CELLOUR MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. TRO - 2, KOLKATA [NOW ITO, WARD - 6(1), KOLKATA], KOLKATA

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) – 23, Kolkata dated 24.03.2017 passed ex-parte whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

The assessee in the present is a company which is engaged in the business of dealing in shares and financing. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 20.09.2012 declaring a total income of Rs. 21,130/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee could not satisfactorily explain the cash credits representing share capital and share premium amounting to Rs. 6.35 crores in terms of section 68 in spite of sufficient and specific opportunity given by the AO. The AO, therefore, proceeded to complete the assessment to the best of his judgement

Aggrieved by the order of AO passed u/s 144, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and since there was no satisfactory compliance to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeal for hearing from time to time, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide his appellate order dated 25.03.2015 passed ex-parte thereby confirming the addition made by the AO on account of share capital and share premium u/s 68. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. In support of the preliminary issue raised in Ground No. 1 of this appeal challenging the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte, the learned counsel for the assessee has contended that the authorised representative of the assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on 15.03.2017 when the appeal was finally fixed for hearing due to illness and the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee vide his impugned order passed ex-parte without giving any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee which has clearly resulted in violation of principle of natural justice. He has also filed an affidavit of Advocate Shri Shravan Kumar Drolia who was authorised to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on behalf of the assessee affirming the relevant facts on oath and keeping in view the same, we are of the view that the assessee deserves to be given

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 18th December, 2018.