Shree Logistics, Jharkhand vs JCIT | ITAT Kolkata 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “D” KOLKATA

Before: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member:- This appeal by the assessee is against the order dated 22.02.2016 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata for assessment year 2010-11. 2. Only issue is to be considered is as whether the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in passing order ex parte in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Ld. AR submits that assessee filed appeal before CIT(A) showing the address for correspondence at 174/13, N.S.C.Bose Road, First Floor, Tollygunge, Kolkata- 70004 thereafter assessee shifted to New Kalimati Road, Garhabasa, Golmuri, Jamshedpur-831003. The assessee informed the said fact of change of address before Ld. CIT(A) on 18.05.2015 and Assessing Officer. The assessee sought transfer of A.Y. 2010-11 Shree Logistics vs. JCIT Rj 25, Kol. Page 2 records to the changed jurisdiction. Thereafter the assessee did not receive any information or confirmation about the transfer of jurisdiction and assessment records and referred to affidavit dated 12.02.2018. The assessee did not receive any notice of hearing at the new address and was unaware of dates of hearing fixed by CIT(A) as well as AO under remand proceedings Ld. AR argued that the assessee may be provided an opportunity to conduct its case before the AO. Ld. AR further submits that partner of the assessee personally attended before the AO and filed relevant details of documents including the details of creditor. Further, the details of freight payments also filed and referred to paper book containing pages 18 to 115.

Ld. DR submits that Assessing Officer as well as Ld. CIT(A) has offered many opportunities to the assessee and in spite of which the assessee did not avail the same and did not co-operate before the Authorities Below. Ld. DR referred to para 1.1 of the appellate order, which is reproduced below:- “1.1 My predecessor has fixed the case for hearing on thirteen times from 05.05.21014 to 25.05.2015 either there was no response from the appellant or the appellant A/R asked for the adjournment. Subsequently I have posted the case for hearing on six occasions the response of the appellant is as follows: Date of notice Date of hearing Remarks 12/08/2015 08/09/2015 None attended 21/02/2015 15/10/2015 Letter returned unserved. However notice was served through the Assessing Officer, Sri Surendra Joshi attended and requested adjournment. Informed him to submit the details to the AO for submission of remand report. The case fixed for hearing on 24/11/2015 24/11/2015 None attended. No reply received. AO informed that the appellant has not submitted the details. 26/11/2015 23/12/2015 None attended. No reply received. 01/01/2016 28/01/2016 None attended.

Ld. DR also referred to para 2.3 of appellate order of CIT(A) and argued that assessee does not deserve an opportunity to be given and relied on the order of Authorities Below. A.Y. 2010-11 Shree Logistics vs. JCIT Rj 25, Kol. Page 3 6. Heard rival submissions perused material available on record. The AO found the total receipts of ₹6,73,23,579/- from profit and loss account. Further the AO noticed that the assessee claimed expense on its own vehicles and sum of ₹5,54,83,880/- toward payment to other trailer owners by way of freight charges. The AO doubted the said freight chares paid to other trailer owners as no bills from the said parties were filed in the assessment proceeding. Further, the AO for non submission of any details in proving the genuineness sundry creditors as found from the books of assessee, the AO added the amount of ₹1,43,07,715/-. On perusal of the order of CIT(A), we find on a contention by the assessee, CIT(A) sought remand report was sought from the AO. According to CIT(A), assessee did not avail the opportunity in filing the details in respect of sundry creditors and freight charges before the AO in remand proceedings and confirmed the order of AO.

Before us Ld. AR referred to affidavit dated 12.02.2018 as deposed by one of the partners of assessee that the registered office of the assessee changed from Kolkata to Jamshedpur and the same was informed to AO and CIT(A). He also deposed that the assessee sought transfer of assessment records to the changed jurisdiction and no such confirmation from the authorities was received by the assessee. It is also noticed from the order of CIT(A) that assessee did not avail the opportunity granted to assessee in the remand proceedings, only for the reason that no notice was received by the assessee during the course of remand proceedings. We find that the details and confirmation from sundry creditors were filed before us by way of paper book from pages 1 to 15 in respect of sundry creditors. It is also noticed that the details of agreement, sample consignment notes, copy of ledger account of freight, copy of financial statement for year ending on 31.03.2010 and 31.03.2009 and copy of letter date 18.05.2015 intimating the CIT(A) about the change of address of the assessee were filed from pages 18 to 115 of the paper book. It was the contention of Ld. AR that another opportunity may be granted to the assessee to prosecute its case in terms of documents as filed before this Tribunal by way of paper book as discussed above and the non-appearance was due to change of address. We find force in the argument of Ld. AR. Therefore taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,

SHREE LOGISTICS,JHARKHAND vs. JCIT, RANGE 25, KOLKATA, KOLKATA