VAISHALI FILMS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 89/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2024AY 2014-15Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)3 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the principle of not condemning anyone unheard. The assessee was directed to attend the proceedings and file necessary evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was decided ex-parte by the CIT(A) as the assessee could not appear for hearings. The assessee claimed that due to reasons beyond their control, some required documents could not be filed before the AO and CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex-parte without hearing the assessee is sustainable, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 08.12.2023 for the AY 2014-15.

2.

At the outset the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the appeal was decided by the first appellate authority ex-parte as the assessee could not appear on the various dates of hearings either in person or through authorized representative.

Assessment Year: 2014-15 Vaishali Films Pvt. Ltd. The Ld. A.R also stated that even before the AO, the assessee has furnished some documents however due to the reasons beyond the control of the assessee, some papers/documents, which were required to be filed to explain the transactions, could not be filed. The Ld. A.R drew our attention to the various petty additions made which were under challenge before this Tribunal. The Ld. A.R prayed that if the matter is restored to the file of AO then all the additions could be explained to be not liable to be made to the income of the assessee.

3.

The Ld. D.R on the other hand fairly agreed to the contentions of the Ld. A.R that if the issues are left open before the AO then the revenue has no objection.

4.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings has made various small additions which were also challenged before the Ld. CIT(A) who confirmed these additions in ex-parte proceedings upon the assessee having been failed to turn up or show up on the various dates for hearing. Though the non-appearance is clearly attributed to the assessee however in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that no one should be condemned unheard and therefore we deem it fit to restore the appeal to the file of AO for fresh de novo adjudication of the issues. At the same time, we direct the assessee to attend the proceedings before the AO and file the evidences which the assessee may wish to explain the impugned issues.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 3rd May, 2024

Sd/- Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma /संजय शमा�) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश कुमार) Judicial Member/�या�यक सद�य Accountant Member/लेखा सद�य

Dated: 3rd May, 2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →