Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap
Date of concluding the hearing : November 30, 2017 Date of pronouncing the order : November 30, 2017 O R D E R
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Kolkata dated 19.06.2017, whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte.
The assessee in the present case is a Company, which is engaged in the business of trading and manufacturing of marbles and ceramics. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 28.09.2010 declaring total income of Rs.26,57,470/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 26.03.2013, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.29,64,030/- after making additions of Rs.1,84,407/-, Rs.1,09,653/- and Rs.12,500/- on account of disallowance out of business promotion expenses, motor car expenses and preliminary expenses respectively.
Assessment Year: 2010-2011 3. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee and since there was no satisfactory compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeal for hearing from time to time, the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the same by his impugned order passed ex parte after discussing the non-compliance of the assessee in paragraph no. 3 as under:- “3. Notices for hearing were issued on 27.06.2016, 30.01.2017 & 05.05.2017. In response to notice dated 30.01.2017, appellant’s AR had filed an adjournment letter and as per his request, hearing was fixed on 06.04.2017. However, nobody attended on that date. Consequently another notice dated 05.05.2017 was issued. However, there was no respsonse to these notices. Neither has assessee filed any written submission or documents in support its grounds of appeal. It appears that assessee is not interested in pursuing its appeal. Hence, I hereby proceed to decide this appeal on the basis of information available on record”.
Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
In Ground No. 1, the assessee has raised a preliminary issue challenging the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex parte on the ground that he has not allowed reasonable, adequate and effective opportunity of hearing. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed on behalf of the assessee giving reason for the non-appearance before the ld. CIT(Appeals) as on 05.05.2017 as under:- “(1) That I am duly empowered and authorised by the appellant in Appeal No. 517/CIT(A)-18/16-17/Cir- 10(1)/Kol to represent the case before ld. CIT(A)-18, Kolkata.
(2) That on 05.05.2017 while coming from my office I was stuck due to heavy traffic jam because of some political rally.
(3)That when I ultimately reached ld. CIT(A)’s office on 05.05.2017 the ld. CIT(A) has left office.
Assessment Year: 2010-2011 (4) That there was no occasion for filing adjournment petition because of the compelling reasons explained at 2 & 3 above.
(5) That the facts and circumstances explained above are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief”.
Keeping in view the assertion made on behalf of the assessee on oath in the affidavit filed before me, I am satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for non-appearance on the part of the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) when its appeal was fixed for hearing on 05.05.2017. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit after giving proper and sufficient opportunity to the assessee of being heard. As undertaken by the ld. counsel for the assessee, the assessee shall make due compliance before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and extend all possible cooperation in order to enable the ld. CIT(Appeals) to dispose of the appeal expeditiously.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30th day of November, 2017.