Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D”, BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM
O R D E R
Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:
The captioned two appeals filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Years 2012-2013 and 2014-15, are directed against the orders passed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolkata, in Appeal No.1077/CIT (A)-1/ward-2(2)/2014-15 and Appeal No.943/CIT(A)-1/W-2(2)/14-15, dated 15.06.2016 and 09.06.2016, which in turn arise out of assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) Under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (in short the ‘Act’), dated 16.02.2015 and 27.12.2014, respectively.
These two appeals relate to same assessee, different assessment years, common issues involve, therefore these have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The assessee`s appeal in is taken as the lead case.
The brief facts qua the assessee are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of sub broking. The Assessee Company filed its return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 on 18.09.2012 by declaring a business loss of Rs.58,953/- and STCG of Rs.19,268/-. The case of assessee company was selected for scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act and Assessing Officer completed the assessment by making disallowance U/s 14A Read with Rule 8D at Rs. 5,22,110/-.
Aggrieved from the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who has confirmed the addition made by the assessing officer by passing an ex-parte order, without presence of the assessee. The ld.CIT(A) passed the ex-parte order for both the assessment years, that is, A.Y.2012-13 & A.Y.2014-15, observing that assessee had neither attended his officer nor filed any adjournment letter.
Not being satisfied with the order passed by the ld CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before us ( for both the assessment years) and has taken the following grounds of appeal:
1.For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was wrong in not granting proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant.
2. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in mechanically confirming arbitrary disallowance of Rs. 6,21,723/- under section 14A of the Income Tax Act,1961, by the Assessing Officer against the appellant`s own disallowance of Rs.99,613/-, ignoring altogether the basis adopted by the appellant for such disallowance in its return of income, without assigning any reason there for.
Although in this appeal the assessee has raised two grounds of appeal, but at the time of hearing the grievance of the assessee has been confined to ground no. 1 and ground No.2 was not pressed by the assessee. Therefore, the solitary grievance of the assessee in both the years ( in both appeals) is that ld CIT (A) had passed the order ex-parte without giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
6.1 Ld. AR for the assessee has submitted before us that the assessee did not receive any notice of hearing from ld.CIT(A). The assessee had changed its address and intimated the same to Assessing Officer and CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) used to send the notices for hearing on the old address, that is way, the assessee did not get notices form ld.CIT(A).
Consequently, the ld.CIT(A) passed the ex-parte order in both the years.
Therefore, the ld.AR for the assessee has requested us to send the case back to the ld.CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh.
6.2. Even ld. DR for the Revenue has agreed with ld AR, to remit the case back to the file of ld.CIT(A).
6.3 Having heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record, we are of the view that there is merit in the submissions of the assessee, as the proposition canvassed by the ld. AR for the assessee are supported by the facts narrated by him above. The ld AR for the assessee has pointed out that assessee did not receive and notice for hearing from CIT(A) due to change in address. Keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we are of the view that both the appeals should be remit back to the file of the ld CIT(A) to adjudicate both the appeals after giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, we remit the case back to the file of the ld CIT(A) with the direction to adjudicate both the appeals ,after giving proper opportunity of being heard 6.4 In the result, both appeals (ITA No.1557 and 1558/Kol/2016) filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 04/01/2017.