M/S EASTERN STEEL CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 44(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is a partnership firm, which is engaged in the business of trading in iron and steel. As per the information received by the Assessing Officer, the assessee-firm had maintained three Bank accounts with ICICI Bank having substantial transactions and although it had taxable income for all the three years under consideration, no returns of income for the said years were filed by it. He, therefore, issued notices under section 148 on 27.06.2012, in response to which the returns of income were filed by the assessee on 23.08.2012 for A.Y. 2008-09 and 2010-11 declaring total income of Rs.45,320/- and Rs.37,180/- respectively. The return of income for assessment year 2011-12 was filed by the assessee in response to notice under section 148 on 18.09.2012 declaring total income of Rs.31,070/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was called upon by the Assessing Officer to explain the source of cash deposits found to be made in its bank account maintained with ICICI Bank and since the explanation offered by the assessee in this regard was not found acceptable by the Assessing Officer in the absence of sufficient evidence to support and substantiate the same, he treated the cash deposits found to be made by the assessee in the said Bank account as unexplained and additions of Rs.3,94,94,300/-, Rs.4,76,66,029/- and Rs.5,54,61,949/- were made by the Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee for all the three years under consideration in the assessments made under section 147/143(3) of the Act vide orders dated 29.03.2014.

Against the orders passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147/143(3) for all the three years under consideration, appeals were preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and since there was 3 631 & 632/KOL/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-2012 & S.A. Nos.89, 90 & 91/KOL/2017 (arising out of ITA Nos. 630, 631 & 632/KOL/2017) Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 10-11 & 11-12 no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeals for hearing from time to time, the ld. CIT(Appeals) upheld the orders passed by the Assessing Officer and confirmed the additions made to the total income of the assessee vide his appellate orders dated 30.01.2017 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the orders of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred these appeals before the Tribunal.

We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant materials available on record. In the common ground no. 1 raised in all these three appeals, the assessee has raised a preliminary issue challenging the impugned orders passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex- parte. In this regard, an affidavit of the partner of the assessee-firm is filed before us by the ld. counsel for the assessee explaining therein the reasons for the non-appearance on the part of the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) as under:- “I, Vijay Kumar Nopany, partner of M/s Eastern Steel Corporation, son of Late Brahmanand Nopany, aged about 56 years; by religion Hindu, residing at Salt Lake, GC-8I, Kolkata - 700106 do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows- 1. That I am one of the partners of Mls Eastern Steel Corporation. As such, I am competent to swear this affidavit on behalf of the said firm.

2. That the .aforesaid firm being aggrieved with the assessment orders dated 29.03.2014 relating to A.Y.s: 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12 filed appeals before the Ld.CJT(A).