What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found sufficient cause for the assessee's non-compliance and set aside the CIT(Appeals)'s ex-parte order. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(Appeals) for a fresh disposal on merits after providing another opportunity of hearing.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution due to non-compliance with hearing notices. The assessee provided reasons for non-compliance, including preoccupation of their representative and receipt of a notice after the hearing date.

What were the issues?

Whether there was sufficient cause for the assessee's non-compliance with hearing notices issued by the CIT(Appeals), leading to an ex-parte dismissal of their appeal.

Paramount Tea Marketing Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT(A) | ITAT Kolkata 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘C(SMC

Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Kolkata dated 04.07.2014 passed ex-parte, whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution.

The assessee in the present case is a Company, which filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 30.11.2006 declaring total income of Rs.12,05,257/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 23.12.2008, the total income of the assessee was disallowed by the AO at Rs.17,41,957/- after making various additions/disallowances. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) challenging the various ./2014 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 2 of 3 disallowances/additions made by the Assessing Officer. During the course of appellate proceedings, there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(Appeals) fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing on four different occasions. The ld. CIT(Appeals), therefore, dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte for non- prosecution vide his appellate order dated 04.07.2014, which is impugned by the assessee in the present appeal filed before the Tribunal.

3. I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. The Director of the assessee- company has filed an affidavit before me explaining the reasons for non- compliance on the part of the assessee to the four notices of hearing issued by the ld. CIT(Appeals) as under:- “That notice u/s 250 dated 13.09.2010 could not be complied as the Authorized Representative Sri Manish Tiwari, FCA was pre-occupied in auditing books of account of his clients and for filing of returns in respect of corporate entities.

That notice u/s 250 dated 11.07.2011 fixing the hearing on 18.08.2011 may not be said as non-complied since adjournment petition was duly acknowledged by CIT(A)’s office.

That notice u/s 250 dated 27.08.2013 could not be complied as the accountant of the appellant company was pre-occupied to meet audit queries so as to complete the appellant companies audit before 30.09.2013 and filing its Income Tax Return.

That notice u/s 250 dated 20.06.2014 could not be complied as the said notice was received after the date of hearing”.] Keeping in view the reasons given in the affidavit filed by the assesese as above, I am satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for the non- compliance on the part of the assessee when its appeal was fixed for hearing by the ld. CIT(Appeals) on four different dates. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissing the ./2014 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 3 of 3 appeal of the assessee ex parte for non-prosecution and remit the matter back to him with a direction to dispose of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit after giving one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. As undertaken by the ld. counsel for the assessee at the time of hearing before me, the assessee shall make due compliance and extend full cooperation to the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to enable him to dispose of the appeal expeditiously.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on October 04, 2016.

PARAMOUNT TEA MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CIT(A)-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments