DCIT, CIR-2, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI vs. M/S RAIGANJ CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., UTTAR DINAJPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 709/KOL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 January 2017AY 2011-122 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) did not remit the matter for fresh adjudication but restored it to the AO for verification and consequential allowance. Therefore, there was no loss to the Revenue.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s order which directed the AO to verify AGM expenses and commission income. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in remanding the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA

Before: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

आदेश /O R D E R PER Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member:-

1.

This appeal by the Revenue is against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Jalpaiguri dated 13.03.2015. Assessment was framed by DCIT,Circle-2, Jalpaiguri u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide his order dated 25.03.2014 for assessment year 2011-12.

2.

At the outset it was noticed that none appeared on behalf of assessee and the Revenue has moved adjournment petition in 14 cases out of 19 cases listed today for hearing. This en block adjournment is not possible and hence, the possible case, we have taken up for hearing and decided the issue by rejecting the adjournment petition and without appearance of Ld. AR for the assessee.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →