What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's lack of representation and their previous non-appearance before the CIT(A). Consequently, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A). The assessee failed to appear before the ITAT on the date of hearing, and no adjournment application was filed. The ITAT proceeded ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be decided ex-parte due to the assessee's non-appearance, and if not, under what conditions it can be restored.

Ashu Tradecom Private Limited vs DCIT | ITAT Kolkata 2018

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

Hearing: 28.11.2018Pronounced: 30.11.2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “D”, KOLKATA BEFORE SH. J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SH. S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2011-12) vs Ashu Tradecom Pvt.Ltd., DCIT, A-3/5, Gillander House, 3rd Central Circle-3, Aayakar Floor, 8, Netaji Subhas Bhawan Poorva, 110, Road, Kolkata-700001. Shantipally, 5th Floor, PAN-AADCA8385J Kolkata-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh.C.J.Singh, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 28.11.2018 Date of Pronouncement 30.11.2018 ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 10.10.2017 passed by CIT(A)-2, Kolkata for AY 2011-12.

We find no representation on behalf of the appellant assessee nor any application seeking adjournment was filed. The assessee called absent and, therefore, set ex-parte. We proceed to hear Ld.DR. 3. The assessee raised as many as four effective grounds amongst which Ground No.1 is filed challenging the action of CIT(A) in deciding the grounds raised

before the First Appellant Authority ex-parte in the facts and circumstances of the case.

4. Heard Ld.DR and perused the material available on record. The assessee filed this appeal on 05.01.2018. After scrutiny, the Registry, ITAT issued notice dated 09.11.2018 intimating the fixation of date of hearing on 28.11.2018 by RPAD but, however, we find no representation on behalf of the assessee. Ld.DR vehemently argued that the conduct of 1 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2011-12) the assessee shows that it has no respect to the Revenue authorities and refered to the order of CIT(A) and argued that the assessee has not put in appearance before the First Appellant Authority and prayed to dismiss the appeal of the assessee. It is noticed that the CIT(A) fixed the appeal for hearing on three occasions and the assessee filed two adjournment applications on two occasions. Therefore, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of Ld.DR, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A) for his fresh consideration subject to the payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- by the assessee in favour of Prime Minister Relief Fund. The CIT(A) shall satisfy the said payment by the assessee and restore the appeal to the file and pass order in accordance with law. Thus, Ground No.2 & 3 are allowed for statistical purposes.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.11.2018.

ASHU TRADECOM PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 3, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments