Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]
ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year (in short ‘AY’) 2012-13 is directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [in short ld. ‘CIT(A)’] dated 29.04.2024 arising out of the assessment order dated 30.03.2015.
Assessment Year: 2012-13 Germinda Pvt. Ltd.
The brief facts of the case of the appellant is that filed its return of income for the A/Y 2012-2013 declaring total income Nil. The case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny and vide notice dated 28-10-2024 asked from the assessee to furnish details of property sold but assessee could not furnish any documents as a result of which the AO added income from long term capital gain at Rs. 91,26,731, and further added a sum of Rs.157610 being an amount of unsecured loan U/s 68 of the Act.
The said order has been challenged by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) but appeal of the assessee has also been dismissed on the ground that there was no response on behalf of the assessee.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee has preferred the appeal before us.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee instead of entering into the merit of the case has submitted before us that assessee should have given an opportunity to place his case before ld. AO as he possess documentary evidence to satisfy his claim.
The ld. D/R supports the impugned order.
We have perused the order of the AO and find that the AO has added the amount when assessee could not furnish any document with regard to the stamp value for registration for the said property. From the order of the ld. CIT(A) it revals that it has been passed ex party as the appellant has not responded to any of the notices. The operative portion of the order of the ld. CIT(A) is thus— it is apparent that the appellant was provided ample opportunity to made compliances to the notice issued but there was no compliance hence appeal is dismissed.
6.1. The submission of the counsel of the appellant is that assessee has to be given an opportunity to place his case before the A/O as the assessee has sufficient paper to prove his case. Keeping in view the facts of the case and the order passed by the ld. AO as well as ld. CIT(A), we are of this view that an opportunity should be given to the assessee to place his case before the ld. AO. Accordingly, the orders of the ld. AO and ld. CIT(A) are set aside, case is remanded back to the file of the AO for afresh decision Assessment Year: 2012-13 Germinda Pvt. Ltd. by giving an opportunity to the assessee to place his all facts and documents before the AO. We further are of this view that there should be no latches on the part of the assessee in prosecuting the case.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 31st December, 2024
Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश कुमार) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /�द�प कुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सद�य Judicial Member/�या�यक सद�य Dated: 31st December, 2024 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Germinda Pvt. Ltd., 37, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-700071 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-7(1), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)