DAANVIR COMMODITIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 511/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 January 2019AY 2008-093 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It was agreed by both parties that the CIT(A) had passed an ex parte order without adjudicating the issue on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 98 days due to the ill health of their director. The core issue was the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) towards share capital and share premium under Section 68.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition towards share capital and share premium under Section 68. Whether the CIT(A) passed a valid ex parte order without proper adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Shri S.S.Godara, JM & Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM]

Hearing: 26.12.2018Pronounced: 01.01.2019

ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM

1.

This appeal by the Assessee arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Kolkata [in short the ld CIT(A)] in Appeal No.269/CIT(A)- 9/Wd-1(1)/2015-16/Kol dated 28.02.2017 against the order passed by ITO, Ward- 1(1), Kolkata[ in short the ld AO] under section 263 / 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 28.03.2014 for the Assessment Year 2008-09.

2.

At the outset, there is a delay of 98 days in filing of appeal by the assessee before us. The assessee has adduced the reasons that the whole time director who was in-charge of accounts and taxation matter of the assessee company was suffering from bilateral pleural effusion from 03.10.2017 to 04.04.2018 and was advised six months bed rest. The medical certificate in this regard was also enclosed along with Affidavit for delay

Daanvir Commodities Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr. 2008-09 condonation. We have gone through the same and in these facts and circumstances we find that the assessee had duly explained the reasons for the delay in filing of appeal and we are accordingly inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication.

3.

The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition towards share capital and share premium u/s 68 of the Act, in the facts and circumstances of the case.

4.

At the outset, we find that the ld. CIT(A) had passed an order ex parte without adjudicating the issue on merits. Both the parties mutually agreed that this issue requires to be set aside to the file of ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit and appropriate to remand this appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to adjudicate the issue on merits uninfluenced by earlier decision taken by him in this regard. The assessee is directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on 20.03.2019 and not to take any adjournment except due to exceptional or unavoidable circumstances. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 01.01.2019

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →