Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH,KOLKATA
Before: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini
ORDER Per Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, JM:
This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [ in short [ Ld. CIT(A)] , 7, Kolkata dated 31-03-2016 on the following grounds:-
1. That on 17/03/2016, the appeal cases was fixed for hearing for the Assessment Year 2010-11 and 2011- 12, vide appeal no. 431/CIT(A)-7/Kol and 536/CIT(A)-7/Kol respectively.
2. That on the day of hearing the Advocate of the assessee appeared before the Ld. CIT (A) -7, Kolkata. The Ld. CIT (A) told the Advocate that he was appointed as a member of Income lax Appellate Tribunal and he will not take hearing of the cases.
3. That the Ld. CIT (A) violate his own decision and passed the order against the Appeal case no. 431/CIT (A)-7/Kol for the Assessment year 2010-11.
4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal order vide appeal No. 431/CIT(A) -7/Range 26/14 -15 dated 2Yl.Apri120130f the learned CIT(A) is completely arbitrary, unjustified unwarranted and bad-in-law.
5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) is wrong and unjustified in dismissing the appeal by not giving sufficient opportunity of being heard.
Shri Haripada Jana 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing appeal by not giving sufficient opportunity to produce materials to rebut the findings of the assessing officer. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the appellant craves leave to add, alters, amend and/ or withdraw any ground or grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.
At the time of hearing before us the ld.AR for the assessee 2. was absent, petition for adjournment vide dated 06-02-2017 being filed at the time of hearing before us. This is rejected by the Bench.
It is further noticed that the appeal filed by the assessee is time barred. For the assessee the assessee has filed condonation petition after perusing the same and hearing the ld.DR, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and the appeal is admitted and disposed off the same on merits/material available on record.
The brief facts appearing in this case are that the assessee is an individual engaging in catering food, tea, coffee, soft drinks, etc in the name of M/s. Jana Enterprise through various office canteens at Kolkata as per agreements with ESI Hospital and other reputed organizations. The assessee filed his return of income on 28-03-2011 declaring total income of Rs.2,17,035/-. In response to statutory notices, the A/R of the assessee had appeared from time to time to explain the return and submitted the details of accounts apart from list of debtors and creditors with addresses, cash book, ledger, journal, bank book, bank statements were produced together with supporting bills and vouchers. However, the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 21-03-2013 with assessed income at Rs. 16,15,350/- by making various additions.
Shri Haripada Jana 5. We have perused the case records, facts and circumstances of the case. We find that at the very outset that the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex parte order since no one had appeared for the assessee. That the rights and liabilities of the assessee were not adjudicated before the ld. CIT(A) since there was non appearance by the assessee. Hence, to meet the ends of justice we arrive at our considered view to send this case to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for proper determination of rights and liabilities of the assessee and for his fresh adjudication after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the parties. Thus, final opportunity is granted to assessee to represent his case properly before the CIT-A by proper representation on the basis of submissions. Therefore, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) back to his file to adjudicate the appeal afresh in accordance with law. We order accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 09-02-2017