GLOBAL WOOL ALLIANCE PRIVATE LIMITED ,THANE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), KOLKATA

on record. We note that the CIT(A) has rejected the ground challenging additions/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer primarily on the ground that the Appellant had failed to furnish any explanation or documents to rebut the conclusion drawn by the Assessing Officer. On perusal of the order passed by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), it can be seen that the expenses/credits in respect of which addition/disallowances have been made by the Assessing Officer appear to be related to normal business operations such as sundry creditors, labour charges, repair & maintenance expenses, sales commission, etc. It appears that both the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) drew adverse inference since the Appellant could not provide proper explanation and relevant details and documents. Mr. Sanjeev Mohta, the Director of the Appellant- Company, appearing before us, had stated the facts and circumstances under which the Appellant was not able to efficiently prosecute the appeals and furnish relevant documents/details. In our view, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, no prejudice would be cause to the Revenue, in case another opportunity is granted to the Appellant to present its case before the Assessing Officer as the Assessing Officer would be at liberty to examine the issues afresh as per law. Accordingly, keeping in view the interest of justice, the issues raised in the present appeal vide Ground No. 3 to 10 are remanded back to the file of Assessing Officer for adjudication afresh after giving Appellant a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Appellant is directed to file proper explanation and furnish all relevant details/documents on which the Appellant wishes to place reliance forthwith on getting intimation/information of hearing before the Assessing Officer without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. It is also clarified that the Assessing Officer would be at liberty carry out inquiry/investigation into the issues remanded as per law. In terms of the aforesaid, Ground No. 3 to 10 are allowed for statistical purposes while Ground No. 1, 2 and 11 are dismissed as being infructuous.

In result, the present appeal preferred by the Assessee is partly 7. allowed.

Order pronounced on 29.01.2024.