M/S DAKSHIN DAMODAR COLD STORAGE (P) LTD.,BURDWAN vs. ACIT(IT), CIR-1, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

The assessee in the present case is a Company, which is engaged in the business of running a Cold Storage. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 18.12.2006 declaring a loss of Rs.10,39,654/-. The case of the assessee was selected by the Assessing Officer for scrutiny and notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued by him to the assessee on 08.11.2007. There was, however, no compliance on the part of the assessee to the said notices as well as the subsequent notices issued by the Assessing Officer under section 142(1) fixing the case of the assessee for hearing from time to time. The ./2017 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 2 of 4 Assessing Officer, therefore, was left with no option but to complete the assessment ex-parte under section 144 to the best of his judgment on the basis of material available on record. In the assessment so completed vide an order dated 29.12.2008, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.2,73,890/- after making the following disallowances:-

Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 144, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals), who dismissed the said appeal and confirmed the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of various expenses for the following reasons given in his impugned order:- “I have examined the material on record and find that the appellant has nowhere been able to show that he did incur the expenses or that the expenses, even if incurred, were wholly or exclusively for his business in the backdrop of the fact that he has shown that there was no operation of the cold storage throughout the relevant period. I cannot find any material on record to show that there was any aberration or arbitrariness or unlawfulness in the order of the AO in this regard. The appeal of the appellant stands dismissed. Further there is no evidence that there was provided for the appellant’s latest contention that the addition of Rs.13 lakh odd that the AO has made was not account of disallowance of expenses but on account of stock discrepancy. No such feature emerges from the AO’s order or the material on record. The said disallowance is in the form of expenses claimed as is evident from the profit and loss account of the appellant. This ground also cannot therefore be entertained and is dismissed”. ./2017 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 3 of 4 Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), 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 ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the appeal against the order of the Assessing Officer passed under section 144 was filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) in February, 2009 and when the same was fixed for hearing by the ld. CIT(Appeals) initially in December, 2012, the relevant details and documents were furnished by the assessee vide letter dated 04.12.2012 to support and substantiate its case on the issues relating to various disallowances made by the Assessing Officer. He has submitted that the appeal of the assessee, however, was not disposed of by the ld. CIT(Appeals) immediately thereafter and the same was again fixed for hearing by the new incumbent in February, 2016 when the details and documents furnished earlier vide letter dated 04.12.2012 were again filed by the assessee vide letter dated 02.12.2016. He has contended that the ld. CIT(Appeals), however, has not taken into consideration these relevant details and documents furnished by the assessee while confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer out of various expenses and this position clearly evident from the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) is not disputed even by the ld. D.R. He, however, has contended that if the Tribunal is inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee, the matter may be sent back to the Assessing Officer for verification of the details and documents filed by the assessee for the first time before the ld. CIT(Appeals) as there was no compliance on the part of the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings resulting in the passing of an ex-parte order by the Assessing Officer under section 144. I find merit in this contention of the ld. D.R. and since the ld. counsel for the assessee has also not raised any objection in this regard, I set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for making the assessment afresh after verifying the relevant details and documents ./2017 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 4 of 4 furnished by the assessee and after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on August 08, 2017.