GIRISH KISHANLAL SHARMA,KOLKATA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 34(1), KOLKATA

ITA 1405/KOL/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Girish Kshanlal Sharma against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, for the assessment year 2016-17. The appeal was initially dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance by the assessee. The ITAT noted the absence of representation for the assessee and the lack of sufficient hearing opportunity provided by the CIT(A). Consequently, the ITAT decided to grant a re-hearing to the assessee, emphasizing the need for a fair opportunity to substantiate his claims with supporting documents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 774789 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 28-06-2025
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDIP SARKAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1405/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Girish Kshanlal Sharma Room No.218, Old China Bazaar Street, Kol-1. (PAN: ANSPS3752Q) Vs ITO, Ward-34(1), Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Sandip Sarkar, Sr. DR- JCIT Date of Hearing : 01.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01.09.2025 ORDER Per George Mathan: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.CIT(A), Kolkata- 10/10312/2018-19 dated 05.09.2024 for assessment year 2016-17. 2. None represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sandip Sarkar, Sr. DR- JCIT represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal has been filed by the assessee with a delay of 210 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay. The reasons in the affidavit are plausible and valid. Consequently, the delay in filing Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1405/Kol/2025 Girish Kshanlal Sharma 2 the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits. 4. We notice that notice through RPAD had been issued to the assessee but the assessee has chosen not to appear. Consequently, the appeal of the revenue is being disposed off ex parte the assessee. 5. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) clearly shows that the assessee could not make any compliance before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. This being so, in the interest of justice, we grant the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate his claim before the ld. CIT(A) by restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall produce all the supporting documents to substantiate his claim and shall cooperate in the re-adjudication proceedings positively. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 1st September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Sanjay Awasthi] [George Mathan] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated: 01.09.2025. RS Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1405/Kol/2025 Girish Kshanlal Sharma 3 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "