MAJESTIC DEALMARK PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-4(2), KOLKATA

Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the return of income for the AY 2017-18 was filed by the assessee declaring total income at Rs. 213/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny, notices u/s 143(2) was issued. The assessee has been asked Assessment Year: 2017-18 Majestic Dealmark Pvt. Ltd. to give details of investment of company in unquoted shares but no details have been submitted. Consequent thereto, the AO added an amount of Rs. 1,13,540/- as an unexplained investment u/s 69A of the Act and total income has been assessed at Rs. 1,14,11,575/-.

The said order has been challenged by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee had been dismissed on account of non-response from the side of the assessee.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee challenges the impugned order by submitting that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an order behind his back. According to him, no notices have been served to him. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that the assessee has been given an opportunity to place his case before the Ld. CIT(A). He has filed an Affidavit in support of its contentions with regard to the non-appearance before the Ld. CIT(A).

The Ld. D.R supports the impugned order.

We have perused the order of Ld. CIT(A) and find that the assessee has been given several opportunities to present its case but he did not respond as a result of which the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed without adjudicating the matter. We have gone through the Affidavit filed by the assessee which is as follows: