JITENDRA RAMPURIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 35(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 535/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 October 2018AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was non-speaking and violated Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, the appeal was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing three effective opportunities of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 was against the CIT(A)'s order confirming the Assessing Officer's disallowances on loans, interest, sales promotion, and advertisement expenses. The CIT(A) passed the order ex parte without discussing the service of hearing notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed a speaking order and afforded proper opportunities of hearing to the assessee before passing an ex parte order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250(6),Section 40(a)(ia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA

Before: Shri S.S, Godara

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14, arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata’s order dated 12.01.2018 passed in case No.81/CIT(A)-10/Wd-35(2)/13-14/6-17/Kol. involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’.

2.

I notice at the outset that CIT(A)’s order under challenge confirming the Assessing Officer’s action disallowing / adding loan in the name of Rajesh Datta, interest paid u/s. 40(a)(ia) to M/s Madan Mohan sales promotion, sales promotion @ 10%, advertisement expenses, interest disallowance involving sums of ₹ 15 lac, ₹1.15 lac, ₹30,760/-, ₹42,145/- and ₹6,08,034/-; respectively passed ex parte. There is no discussion at all in the lower appellate order about actual service of hearing notice to the assessee. Learned Departmental Representative fails to rebut the fact that CIT(A) has affirmed Assessing Officer’s action with a total non speaking lower appellate

ITA No.535/Kol/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 Jitendra Rampuria Vs. ITO Wd-35(2) Kol. Page 2 order in violation of sec. 250(6) of the Act specifying points of determination to be treated followed by a detailed discussion. I therefore remit the instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication as per law after affording three effective opportunities of hearing to the taxpayer for presenting his case.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is accepted for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 05/10/2018 (S.S. Godara) Judicial Member Kolkata, *Dkp/Sr.PS "दनांकः- 05/10/2018 कोलकाता आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant-Jitendra Rampuria, C/O S.C. Rampuria & Co. 15,Noormalahia Lane, Kolkata-007

2.

""यथ"/Respondent-ITO, Ward-35(2), Ayakar Bhawan, Poorva 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700110 3. संबं"धत आयकर आयु%त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु%त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. &वभागीय ")त)न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गाड+ फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, // Sr. Private Secretary, Head of Office/DDO आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता ।

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →