IMMENSE DEALMARK PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 9(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 202/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 January 2019AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order and that the matter should be adjudicated de novo on merits. The appeal was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance and absence on the hearing date. The assessee contested the addition made under Section 68 and the ex-parte order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order without adjudicating the merits of the addition. The need for de novo adjudication on the grounds raised by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Sri S.S. Godara & Sri M. Balaganesh

Assessment Year: 2012-13 Immense Dealmark Pvt. Ltd.......…………….......................…..……………….…...……..…….............Appellant 7, Red Cross Place 4th Floor Kolkata – 700 001 [PAN : AACCI 7249 E] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(3), Kolkata……...................................………………...…...........Respondent Appearances by: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Addl. CIT D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : December 27th , 2018 Date of pronouncing the order : January 1st , 2019 ORDER Per Bench :- This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -3, Kolkata, (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 12/12/2017, arising out the assessment order of the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. AO”), dt. 07/03/2015, passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), relating to Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

The prime ground raised by the assessee apart from contesting the addition made u/s 68 of the Act, is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in passing ex-parte order against the assessee.

3.

At the outset, we find that the ld. CIT(A) passed the order ex-parte, on the ground that there was non-compliance by the assessee before him and the assessee has been given adjournment on several dates and the last date for appearing was fixed on 04/12/2017, on which date none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment petition was preferred by the assessee. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee by holding that the assessee has nothing to say on the merits of the addition. Both the parties mutually agreed that this issue requires to be sent back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

Assessment Year: 2012-13 Immense Dealmark Pvt. Ltd 3.1. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit and proper in the interest of justice and fairplay to remand this appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits and the ld. CIT(A) is directed to take a decision uninfluenced by his earlier decision taken in this regard. The assessee is directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) on 22/03/2019, and not to take adjournment except due to exceptional or bonafide circumstances. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

4.

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 1st day of January, 2019.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →