KARMICK SOLUTION PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1669/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 August 2018AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal noted that the CIT(A)'s order confirming the penalty was passed ex parte. The assessee argued that they were not served notice due to a change of address, preventing them from participating in the lower appellate proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal is against a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(C) of the Income Tax Act. The penalty was confirmed ex parte by the CIT(A). The assessee claims they were not properly served notice of the lower appellate proceedings due to a change of address.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty was validly imposed when the assessee was not properly served notice of the appellate proceedings due to a change of address.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(C)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “D” KOLKATA

Before: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godara

आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S.Godara, Judicial Member:- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Kolkata’s order dated 26.05.2017, passed in case No.645/CIT(A)-18/17-18/ITO, Wd.5(4)Kol, upholding Assessing Officer’s action imposing penalty of ₹7,26,042/- involving proceedings u/s 271(1)(C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’ Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges at the outset that CIT(A)’s order confirms the above stated penalty ex parte. Learned counsel takes us assessee’s first substantive ground pleading therein that the assessee had changed his address from 26A Prince Anwar Shah Road, Kolkata-700 045 to 116A, Premises No. 1118, Karmick House,6th Purbalok, Kalikapur, Kolkata-7000 099. He therefore submits that the assessee could not be Karmick Solutin Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Wd-2(3), Kol. Page 2 served notice of the lower appellate proceedings on account of change in address. Further reference to necessary correction as per

More judgments on Section 271(1)(C)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(C) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →