J G FINANCE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is a non-banking finance company. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 24.09.2008 declaring a total income at Nil. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 30.12.2010, the total income of the assessee was determined by the A.O. at Rs. 3,64,102/- after making certain additions.

Against the order passed by the A.O. under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) disputing J.G. Finance Ltd. the additions made by the A.O. and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeal for hearing on 30.03.2016, 21.04.2016 and 23.05.2017, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide his appellate order dated 30.05.2017 passed ex-parte for non-prosecution. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. The assessee has raised a preliminary issue in this appeal challenging the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte for non-prosecution on the ground that there was a sufficient cause for the non-appearance of the assessee at the time of hearings fixed before the Ld. CIT(A) on 30.03.2016, 21.04.2016 and 23.05.2017. In this regard, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the authorised representative of the assessee had gone to the office of the Ld. CIT(A) for hearing on 30.03.2016 but the Ld. CIT(A) was not available in the office. He has also submitted that on the next date of hearing fixed by the Ld. CIT(A) on 21.04.2016, there were general elections in West Bengal including the part of Kolkata while the notice of hearing fixed by the Ld. CIT(A) on 23.05.2017 was received by the assessee only on 26.05.2017. Keeping in view these submissions made by the assessee, I am satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for the non-appearance of the assessee at the time of hearings fixed before the Ld. CIT(A). I, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex- parte dismissing the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution and remit the matter back to him for disposing of appeal of the assessee