COMMITMENT FINANCE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 2(1), KOLKATA

The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 21.11.2023 for AY 2017-18.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order passed without hearing the assessee on merit. The Ld. AR drew our attention to page 3 para 5 of the appellate order and submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had fixed the dates of hearings three times viz., 18.02.2021, 06.10.2023 and 17.10.2023. The Ld. AR submitted that on 18.01.2021 the assessee applied for the adjournment whereas on the remaining two occasions there was no compliance on the part of the assessee. The Ld. AR submitted that the case was assigned to Shri Kalyan Mukherjee, CA having his office at 52/1, Shakespeare Sarani, 16th Floor, Kolkata and the assessee was under the bonafide impression that proper compliance was being made by the said counsel before the Ld. CIT(A). However, on receipt of the appellate order the assessee came to know about appeal having been heard ex parte. The Ld. AR also drew our attention to page no. 3 para 2.4 of the assessment order wherein the AO has recorded a finding that the assessee has done transactions in Jay Ushin Ltd. share which was a penny stock. The ld. AR stated that the AO has treated he said stock as penny stock whereas the list of 84 stocks as published by CAG, a copy of which was placed before the bench at the time of hearing did not contain the said stock. The Ld. AR, therefore, prayed that since the facts noted by the AO during the assessment proceeding are factually incorrect and,