M/S. BLISS DEVELOPERS,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 40(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(A) was due to a change in address and non-receipt of notices. Therefore, the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) was set aside.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a belated original return and then a revised return declaring NIL income. The AO treated the revised return as invalid and completed the assessment based on the original return. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without ensuring proper service of notices to the assessee. Whether the assessee had sufficient cause for non-appearance before the CIT(A).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “SMC”, KOLKATA
Before: SH. P.M.JAGTAP
PER P.M.JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)- 12, Kolkata dated 01.03.2018 passed ex-parte whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The assessee in the present case is a partnership firm. The return of the income for the year under consideration was originally filed by it on 04.03.2014 declaring a total income of Rs.19,78,324/-. Thereafter, a revised return was filed by the assessee on 11.03.2014 declaring its total income at NIL. Since the original return was filed by the assessee belatedly u/s 139(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”), the revised return filed by the assessee was treated by the AO as invalid and the assessment was completed by him on a total income of Rs.19,78,324/- as declared by the assessee in the return of income originally filed vide an order dated 13.03.2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act.
Against the order passed by AO u/s 143(3) of the Act, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before Ld.CIT(A) and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeal for Page | 1
Year: 2013-14] hearing from time to time, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide his impugned order passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
I have heard the arguments of both the sides and perused the relevant material available on record. In support of the preliminary issue raised in Ground No.1 challenging the impugned order passed by Ld.CIT(A) ex-parte, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that there was a change in the address of the assessee during the relevant period and the notices sent by Ld.CIT(A) to the old address could not be received by the assessee. He has contended that such non- receipt of the notices resulted into non-appearance of the assessee before Ld.CIT(A) when its appeal was fixed for hearing from time to time. Keeping in view this submission made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, I am satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for the non-appearance of the assessee before Ld.CIT(A) when its appeal was fixed for hearing from time to time. I therefore, set aside the impugned passed by Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit after giving one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. As undertaken by Ld. Counsel for the assessee, the assessee shall make due compliance before Ld.CIT(A) and shall extend all the possible co-operations in order to enable Ld.CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal expeditiously.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21.08.2018.
More judgments on Section 139(4)
- Sanket Vijaybhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs Dy.CIT Circle 3(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2446/AHD/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Gurukul Shiksha Sanstha, Chandrapur vs ITO Ward - 3, Exemp, NagpurITA 549/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Aryanparv Realty LLP, Ahmedabad vs ITO Ward 3 3 1, AhmedabadITA 910/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Vishal Rameshbhai Sorathiya, Rajkot vs The ITO WD 1(1)(1), RajkotITA 485/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- M/S. Development Education & Welfare Trust… vs I.T.O., Ward - 2(3), AlipurduarITA 2367/KOL/2026[2020-2021]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2020-2021
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026