M/s. Everglow Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. I.T.O., Ward-12(2), Kolkata
[Citation -2016-LL-0930-123]

Citation 2016-LL-0930-123
Appellant Name M/s. Everglow Investment Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent Name I.T.O., Ward-12(2), Kolkata
Court ITAT-Kolkata
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 30/09/2016
Assessment Year 2005-06
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags opportunity of being heard • share application money • non deduction of tds
Bot Summary: ORDER Per Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM The captioned appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to A.Y.2005-06, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-9, Kolkata in Appeal No.684/C.I.T.(A)-9/Wd-12(2)/2014-15/Kol, dated 30.03.2016, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 147/143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.10.2009. Aggrieved from the order of the ld AO the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before us. AR for the assessee has submitted that the assessee under consideration never received any notices from the office of the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order without giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee which is against the principle of natural justice. CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH D KOLKATA [Before Hon ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM] ITA No.1028/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2005-06 M/s. Everglow Investment Pvt. Ltd. -versus- I.T.O., Ward-12(2). Kolkata Kolkata [PAN: AAACE 5803 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For Appellant : Shri Sunil Surana For Respondent : Md.Ghayas Uddin, JCIT Date of Hearing : 29.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2016. ORDER Per Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM captioned appeal filed by assessee pertaining to A.Y.2005-06, is directed against order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata in Appeal No.684/C.I.T.(A)-9/Wd-12(2)/2014-15/Kol, dated 30.03.2016, which in turn arises out of order passed by Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 147/143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, Act ) dated 06.10.2009. 2. facts of case are stated in brief. Assessee had filed its return of income for A.Y.2005-06 on 21.12.2005, declaring total income of Rs.1,90,630/-. case was duly processed on 11.01.2007 u/s 143(1) of Act. Subsequently case was selected for re-assessment u/s 148 of Act and AO has completed assessment by making additions on account of share application money, expenses disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) of Act and excess claim of liability. Aggrieved from order of ld AO assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A), who has dismissed appeal of assessee by observing followings :- In this case, notice u/s 250 was issued on 26/12/2015 by which date of hearing was fixed on 23/03/2015 however, neither anybody attended nor any written reply was received on date of hearing. Therefore, fresh notices dated 12/05/2015, 19/06/2015, 2 ITA No.1028/Kol/2016 M/s. Everglow Investment Pvt. Ltd. A..Y.2005-06 28/07/2015, 04/12/2015 and 10/03/2016 respectively were issued but there was no compliance on part of appellant. Since there is no compliance during appellant proceedings and there is no new fact/details available for consideration, I do not find any infirmity in AO s order. Therefore, appeal is dismissed. 3. Not being satisfied with order of ld. CIT(A), assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. Although in this appeal assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal but at time of hearing solitary grievance of assessee has been confined to only ground No.1 which relates to ex parte order made by ld. CIT(A) without giving opportunity of being heard to assessee. ld. AR for assessee has submitted that assessee under consideration never received any notices from office of ld. CIT(A). Since, assessee did not receive any notice of hearing from ld. CIT(A), at all, therefore, he could not file any written submission and could not attend office of ld. CIT(A). In this ways ld. CIT(A) has passed order without giving opportunity of being heard to assessee which is against principle of natural justice. 5. On other hand, ld. DR for revenue has primarily reiterated stand taken by ld. CIT(A) which we have already noted in earlier para and is not being repeated for sake of brevity. 6. Having heard rival submission, perused material available on record, we are of view that there is merit in submissions of assessee, as proposition canvassed by ld. AR for assessee are supported by facts cited by him above. He explained that assessee did not receive any notice of hearing from ld. CIT(A). Therefore, he could not file any written submission and could not attend office of ld. CIT(A). Even ld DR for Revenue has agreed on this. Therefore, considering above cited factual position we are of view that this issue requires fresh examination by ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we remit case 3 ITA No.1028/Kol/2016 M/s. Everglow Investment Pvt. Ltd. A..Y.2005-06 back to ld. CIT(A) to decide appeal afresh after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to assessee. 7. In result, all grounds of appeal of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 30.09.2016. Sd/- Sd/- [S.S.Viswanethra Ravi] [Dr.Arjun Lal Saini] Judicial Member Accountant Member Date: 30.09.2016. R.G.(.P.S.) Copy of order forwarded to: 1. M/s. Everglow Investment Pvt. Ltd., 56/2, Hazra Road, 3rd Floor, Kolkata- 700019. 2 I.T.O., Ward-12(2), Kolkta. 3. C.I.T.(A)- 9, Kolkata. 4. C.I.T-4, Kolkata. 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. True Copy, By order, Deputy /Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Kolkata Benches M/s. Everglow Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. I.T.O., Ward-12(2), Kolkata
Report Error