Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH ‘A’, KOLKATA
Before: Shri P. M. Jagtap, A.M. & Shri N.V.Vasudevan, J.M.)
ORDER Shri P.M.Jagtap, A.M. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT-VIII, Kolkata, dated 21.03.2013 for the assessment year 2008- 09 passed ex parte whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution.
The assessee in the present case is a company which is engaged in the business of trading of drugs and drugs formulation. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 27.09.2008 declaring total income at Nil and claiming carried forward loss of Rs.17,22,565/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(2) vide order dated 31.12.2010, the total income of the assessee was determined by the AO at Rs.11,14,920/- after making various additions aggregating to Rs.28,37,485/-. Against the order passed by the AO under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) disputing all the additions made by the AO to his total income.
Greencross Therapeutics Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2008-09 3. During the course of appellate proceedings, a notice was issued by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee on 11.03.2013 fixing the hearing on 20.03.2013. Since nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee on the said date, the ld. CIT(A) presumed that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal filed before him and proceeded to dismiss the same for non-prosecution without going into the merit of the issues involved therein. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material on record. As rightly submitted by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, only one opportunity was given by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee by fixing the hearing on 20.03.2013 by a notice issued on 11.03.2013 and this position clearly evident from the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) has not been disputed even by the ld. DR. It is thus clear that the appeal filed by the assessee before him has been dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) by his impugned order passed ex parte without giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and there is a clear violation of principles of natural justice. We therefore, set aside the said order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 22nd April, 2016.