KAILASHGIRI PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 9(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, in the interest of justice, decided to give the assessee one more opportunity to present their case on merits before the CIT(A). Consequently, the appeal was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee sought a stay on a demand of Rs. 2,98,16,401/-. The assessment was framed under section 144, adding Rs. 5,09,50,000/- as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The CIT(A) passed an ex parte order confirming the addition after the assessee failed to appear despite several opportunities.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex parte order, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to argue the case on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : KOLKATA
Before: Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM]
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM By virtue of this stay application the assessee seeks to keep the demand of Rs. 2,98,16,401/- in abeyance. With the consent of both the parties the main appeal was taken up for hearing at the time of hearing of this stay application.
This is an appeal of the Assessee directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 3, Kolkata (in short the ld CITA) in Appeal
2 S.A.No.20/Kol/2018 Kailashgiri Projects Pvt. Ltd. A.Y.2009-10 No. 192/CIT(A)-3/Ward-9(4)/15-16/Kol: dated 28.11.2017 against the order passed by the ITO, Ward-9(4), Kolkata [ in short the ld AO] under section 144/263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 18.03.2015 for the Assessment Year 2009- 10.
3.The effective ground involved in this appeal is as to whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex parte order, in the facts and circumstances of the case.
We have heard the rival submissions. We find that the assessment was framed u/s 144 of the Act wherein a sum of Rs. 5,09,50,000/- was added towards share capital as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) gave several opportunities to the assessee but no appearance was made by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) accordingly confirmed the order of the ld. AO. The ld. AR before us pleaded for one last opportunity to be provided in order to adjudicate the issue on merits and accordingly, prayed for setting aside of this appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A). In response to this, the ld. DR vehemently objected to the request of the ld. AR on the ground that the assessee despite giving several opportunities had not appeared before the Ld. CIT(A). We have gone through careful consideration of the facts and circumstances, we find that the assessee in the instant case should be given one more opportunity to address his grievance on merits before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play we remand this appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The assessee is also directed not to seek any adjournment except due to exceptional or bonafide circumstances. Accordingly grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petition is hereby dismissed.
3 S.A.No.20/Kol/2018 Kailashgiri Projects Pvt. Ltd. A.Y.2009-10 5. In the result, the Stay petition of the assessee is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 07.03.2018.
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026