M/S. KARTIK PRASAD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 33(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is a partnership firm, which is engaged in the business of civil construction. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 30.09.2008 declaring total income of Rs.43,836/- on gross receipt of Rs.97,51,656/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated ./2016 Assessment year: 2008-2009 Page 2 of 3 30.12.2010, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.8,39,232/- after making additions on account of disallowance of labour charges amounting to Rs.7,19,210/-, undisclosed stock/WIP amounting to Rs.32,304/- and disallowance of consumable stores amounting to Rs.43,882/-. Against the said order of the Assessing Officer, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing from time to time, the ld. CIT(Appeals) proceeded to dismiss the same ex parte confirming all the three additions made by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As submitted by the ld. counsel for the asessee, details and documents required to put forth the assessee’s case before the ld. CIT(Appeals) were not fully available with the assessee at the relevant time and in the absence of the same, he could not appear and represent the case of the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) on the dates when the appeal of the assessee was fixed for hearing. He has also filed an affidavit in support and urged that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to put forth his case on merit before the ld. CIT(Appeals) by sending the matter back to him. Although the ld. D.R. has strongly objected to this request made by the ld. counsel for the assessee, I am of the view that such opportunity can be given to the assessee in the interest of justice keeping in view all the facts of the case but subject to payment of the token cost of Rs.1,000/-. Accordingly, the assessee is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund. Subject to the said payment, the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) passed ex parte is set aside and the matter is remitted back to him with a direction to dispose of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit after giving one more opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is directed to ./2016 Assessment year: 2008-2009 Page 3 of 3 comply with the requirements of the ld. CIT(Appeals) and extend all possible cooperation 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.