MAGNITUDE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Before us the contention of the ld.AR was that on the dates of hearing as fixed by the CIT-A, the assesse sought adjournments except on last date of hearing on 19-07-2017. He submits that he was held up in Mumbai in pursuance of his professional duties being extended and approached the CIT-A on the next date i.e. 20-07- 2017 and came to know the hearing proceedings were completed on 19-07-2017 by ex parte. The ld. AR argued that there was no opportunity of the assesse to challenge the action of the AO in the first appellate proceedings. On merits, the ld.AR contended that the assesse company issued equity shares to holding company. But, the AO wrongly held that the shares were allotted to different private limited companies and referred to para-2 of the assessment order. The ld. DR did not controvert the same.

Heard both the parties and perused the record. Before us the ld.AR brought to our notice the details of equity shares that have been allotted to holding company and the AO held that the shares were allotted to different private limited companies. We find that the AO did not discuss the allotment of shares in respect of holding company in his order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Therefore, taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of ld. AR and in the interest of natural justice, we deem it fit and proper to remand the matter to the file of CIT-A for his consideration and to pass an order, after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of hearing to assessee to substantiate its contentions/claim. The assesse shall be at liberty to file requisite evidences/explanation, if any, in support of its claims and contentions. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, the appeal of assesse is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the Court on 29.08.2018