M/S. DIVYANSH ENCLAVE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2003/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 December 2018AY 2008-092 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee required assistance to prosecute its grounds before the CIT(A). In the interest of justice, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration, allowing the assessee to file supporting evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2008-09. The assessee contended that they were not given an opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) had made additions on account of unaccounted cash credit.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity of being heard by the CIT(A) before passing the impugned order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “A”, KOLKATA

Hearing: 19.11.2018Pronounced: 14.12.2018

ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 02.03.2017 passed by CIT(A)-23, Kolkata for AY 2008-09.

2.

Heard both parties and perused the material available on record. It was contended by the Ld.AR that there was no opportunity before the CIT(A) to prosecute grounds raised

against the addition made by the AO and prayed to remand the matter to the CIT(A). Ld.DR opposed the same and referred to para “C” of the impugned order and argued that the CIT(A) issued notice intimating the fixation of date for hearing on 23.01.2017 and notice returned unserved with a remark ‘moved’. Ld. DR submits that the assessee has been given ample opportunity before the CIT(A) wherein the CIT(A) directed the AO to serve notice on assessee. The Inspector conducted local inquiry but no one could identify the existence of the assessee company at the said address. We find that the AO made substantive addition on account of unaccounted cash credit u/s 68 of the (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2008-09) Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) wherein in our opinion requires assistance of the assessee to prosecute its grounds raised before the CIT(A). Therefore, taking into consideration the said facts and the submissions of Ld.DR & Ld.AR and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A) for his fresh consideration. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of his contention. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14.12.2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) (S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER [ Date:- 14.12.2018 *Amit Kumar* Copy forwarded to:

1. 1. Appellant- M/s. Divyansh Enclave Pvt.Ltd., 7A, Bentinck Street, Ground Floor, Room No.16, Kolkata-700001.

2. Respondent- ITO, Ward-6(1), Aayakar Bhawan, 6th Floor, R.No.- 6/13B, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069.

3. CIT-Kolkata 4. CIT(Appeals)-Kolkata 5. DR: ITAT -Kolkata Benches By order

AR/H.O.O ITAT, KOLKATA

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →