PRITY TUBES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 13(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1292/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 October 2018AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed the order ex-parte without proper service of notice or considering the evidence submitted by the assessee. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 concerned disallowances of purchase claims and expenses under Section 14A. The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order affirming the Assessing Officer's disallowances.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing and without considering the evidence submitted by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SH. S.S.GODARA & DR.A.L.SAINI

Hearing: 24.09.2018Pronounced: 26.10.2018

ORDER

PER S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER This assessee’s appeal for AY 2012-13 arises against the order dated 15.03.2017 passed by Learned CIT(A)-5, Kolkata u/s 143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) confirming the Assessing Officer’s action disallowing its purchase claim of Rs.5,21,19,856/- to be bogus followed by section 14A r.w.Rule 8D disallowance of Rs.71,416/- made in the course of assessment framed on 30.03.2015, involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act.

2.

Heard both the parties and reiterating their respective stands in support of the impugned twin disallowances/additions. Case filed perused.

3.

It emerges at the outset from the instant case filed that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed his lower appellate order ex-parte against the assessee while affirming the Assessing Officer’s action disallowing assessee’s purchase of Rs.5,21,19,856/- as bogus as well as invoking section 14A r.w.Rule 8D disallowance of Rs.71,416/- respectively. Learned DR vehemently submitted during the course of hearing that the assessee did not put in appearance in the last three dates of hearing i.e. 04.10.2016, 16.02.2017 and 14.03.2017. We find no merit in the instant arguments as there is not even a single observation about the actual service of Year: 2012-13] corresponding hearing notice in Learned CIT(A)’s order. Coupled with this, it is evident that Learned CIT(A) has nowhere discussed the relevant evidence available in the case filed running into almost 300 pages in support of genuineness of the impugned purchases as stipulated u/s 250(6) of the Act. We therefore restore the instant appeal back to Learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per law after giving adequate opportunity of hearing being heard to the assessee.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.10.2018.

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →