Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Id. Addl./JCIT(A) concerning AY 2014-15. The issue involved is regarding the receipt of share premium by the assessee. The assessee's representative argued that for the succeeding AY 2015-16, an identical issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for readjudication.
Held
The Tribunal considered the rival submissions and noted that similar issues in the succeeding assessment year were restored to the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal observed that the assessee was non-represented before the CIT(A), leading to an ex parte order. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the Jurisdictional AO for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the issue related to receipt of share premium by the assessee should be restored to the Assessing Officer for readjudication, especially when the assessee was not represented before the CIT(A) leading to an ex parte order.
Sections Cited
Section 76
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA
Assessee represented by Shri J.M. Pattanaik & Shri Bishwaraj Raut, A.Rs. Department represented by Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr. DR Date of hearing 25/02/2026 Date of pronouncement 25/02/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is the appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-13, Mumbai in Appeal No. CIT(A), Bhubaneswar-1/10768/2017- 18 dated 03/11/2025 for the A.Y. 2014-15.
Shri J.M. Pattanaik & Shri Bishwaraj Raut, ld. A.Rs. appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sanjib Banerjee, ld. Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.
It was submitted by the ld. AR that the issue involved in the present appeal is in regard to the receipt of share premium by the assessee. It was the submission that for the A.Y. 2015-16, identical issue was in appeal and the ld. CIT(A), Kolkata-22 vide his order dated 06/08/2 M/s Rameswar Agro Industries P Ltd. Vs ACIT has restored the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication. It was the submission that in identical lines, this year also, the issues may also be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication.
In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. Addl./JCIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions. Considering the fact that under the identical issues in the immediately succeeding assessment year, the issue has been restored by the ld. CIT(A) to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication. It was the submission of the ld. AR that for this year also the issues are required to be restored to the file of Assessing Officer for readjudication as the assessee has been non- represented before the ld. CIT(A) and the order is the ex parte order. This being so, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. Jurisdictional AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. However, looking to the non-cooperation of the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings even after issuance of notices to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A), we impose a cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousands only) on the assessee, as admitted by the ld. A.R. of the assessee, to be payable to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association, Sector-1, CDA, Cuttack-753014, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the M/s Rameswar Agro Industries P Ltd. Vs ACIT AO at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the above- mentioned cost within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed.
In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 25/02/2026.