MANUSH COMMODITIES (P) LTD. ,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD-15(3), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 612/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 June 2024AY 2014-15Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the case to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication on merit, emphasizing the principles of natural justice and substantial justice over technicalities. The assessee was directed to cooperate in the proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment and appellate orders were passed ex-parte as the assessee could not appear before the authorities. Additional evidences submitted to the CIT(A) were not admitted.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment and appellate orders, without admitting additional evidence, violate principles of natural justice and substantial justice.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 24.04.2023 for the AY 2014-15.

2.

At the outset the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment as well as the appellate order was framed ex-parte as the assessee could not appear before the authorities below. The assessee has filed certain additional evidences like

Assessment Year: 2014-15 Manush Commodites Pvt. Ltd. bank statements, balance sheet, audited accounts, Form 23AC for AY 2012-13 before the ld. CIT(A) however the same were not admitted and taken into account by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that in the interest of justice and fair play, the case of the assessee may be restored to the file of AO for re-adjudication on merit after taking into account the contentions of the assessee on merit.

3.

The Ld. D.R on the other hand strongly objected to the arguments put forward by the Ld. A.R and submitted that despite several opportunities the assessee has failed to appear and finally the case of the assessee was decided ex-parte before the AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. D.R however left the issue to the wisdom of the Bench.

4.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that undisputedly both the authorities below have decided the case ex-parte. So much so the Ld. CIT(A) has not admitted the additional evidences has filed by the assessee under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules comprising bank statement, balance sheet, audited account, auditors report etc. In our opinion, no one should be condemned unheard. In our considered view the assessee needs to be given one more opportunity to present its case on merit before the AO so that the principles of natural justice are satisfied. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the substantial justice should prevail over technicalities. In view of the above, we are inclined to restore the issue to the file of AO with the direction to decide the same after taking into account contentions and evidences which the assessee may file. Simultaneously we direct the assessee to co- operate in the assessment proceedings failing which an adverse view could be taken.

Assessment Year: 2014-15 Manush Commodites Pvt. Ltd. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 5.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 6th June, 2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →