M/s Priti Traders Pvt. Ltd., Howrah V. I.T.O.,Ward-9(3), Kolkata

ITA 1039/KOL/2019

AI Insights

M/s Priti Traders Pvt. Ltd appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Kolkata, which upheld the ex parte assessment order by the ITO, Ward-9(3), Kolkata. The assessment order treated Rs. 1,41,00,000 as unexplained cash credits, which included share capital and securities premium. The appellant failed to provide any representation or documentation during the proceedings before the Assessing Officer, CIT(A), and the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted the repeated absence of the appellant and the lack of credible documentation or representation to establish the identity and existence of the company, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 128170 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 24-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 68; 144; 250

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘ए’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA Įी संजय गग[, ÛयाǓयक सदèय एवं Įी ͬगरȣश अĒवाल, लेखा सदèय के सम¢ Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.1039/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Priti Traders Pvt. Ltd.............................................................. Appellant 6/3, Oiabibitala Lane, Howrah-711104. [PAN:AADCP5492A] vs. ITO, Ward-9(3), Kolkata............................................................ Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : November 24, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : January 02, 2023 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग[, ÛयाǓयक सदèय ɮवारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 02.05.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 18, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). The assessee, in this appeal, has taken the following grounds of appeal: “1. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 18, Kolkata, has erred in law and facts in upholding the order passed by the Ld. ITO Ward - 9(3), Kolkata u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (in short "Act"') in the case of the appellant, without considering that the order of the Ld. Assessing Officer is arbitrary, illegal, unjustified and against the provisions of law. 2. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in passing an ex parte order against the appellant without providing the appellant sufficient time for representation. I.T.A. No.1039/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Priti Traders Pvt. Ltd 2 3. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to consider that the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in making addition of Rs. 1,41,00,000/- as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, being the Share Capital and Securities Premium. 4. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to consider that the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) & 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 2. Before we proceed to deliberate on the facts of the case, it is pertinent to mention in brief the case history of this appeal. The following order was passed by the Tribunal on 18.08.2022: “Notice was sent to the assessee/appellant through registered post has been received back unserved with the remark of the postal authority ‘insufficient address’. Let one more opportunity be given to the assessee and notice be issued to the assessee at the address mentioned in Form 36 as well as at the address mentioned in the assessment order. The notice be also issued through Ld. DR. To come up for hearing for 25.10.22.” Thereafter, the Tribunal passed the following order dated 21.11.22: “This is an appeal filed by the assessee and the assessee is supposed to pursue its appeal. However, notices have been sent to the assessee time and again which have been returned back by the postal authorities with the remark "not verified firm by PRI (P), hence insufficient address". Notice sent for hearing of the appeal for 18.08.22 then for 25.10.22 and then for 21.11.22 i.e. for today have returned back unserved by the postal authorities. However, an application has been filed by one Ms. Trisha Lahiri, wherein, it has been mentioned that due to certain illness, the advocate of the appellant is unable to attend court hearing and that the case may be adjourned. We find that though, a power of attorney of one Mr. Rajiv Kumar Choudhary has been placed on file but there is no address, contact details or even the registration number of the said Mr. Rajiv Kumar Choudhary mentioned on the said prayer of attorney. Under the circumstances, it was directed to Ms. Trisha Lahiri to file proper details of the assessee-appellant as well as details of the concerned counsel for the assessee for the purpose of establishing identity and existence of the appellant. It has been observed several times that in many cases, though the appellants/ concerned assessees are not I.T.A. No.1039/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Priti Traders Pvt. Ltd 3 traceable at the given address but at the same time, the appellants file and pursue their appeals by way of back channel even by concealing their address and identity and adjournments are sought. This, in our view, is being done for the purpose of that if the appeal is decided against the assessee then the department will not be able to recover the due taxes. The assessee being a paper company would not be traceable. A perusal of the case records further show that even the assessment order passed, in this case, is an ex parte order u/s 144 of the Act and even the impugned order of the CIT (A) is also an ex parte order. Even before this Tribunal, there is nothing on record from which the identity of the assessee may be established, as a genuine company. However, on being asked to furnish the details, the ld. representative Ms. Trisha Lahiri has left the court and no details have been furnished either by the appellant or by the assessee of the appellant. However, before proceeding to decide the appeal ex parte of the assessee, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity is given to the assessee-appellant to present itself and to furnish the relevant identity and contact address, email details etc. not only of the appellant but also of its counsel. The matter is accordingly adjourned to 24.11.22.” 3. From the above orders passed by the Tribunal, it is evident that the assessee, in this case, though is prosecuting its appeal but at the same time had concealed its identity to avoid the payment of taxes at a later stage or for the reasons best known to it. When this Tribunal asked the counsel for the assessee to furnish the identity, details of the assessee, the counsel left the court and even after granting of opportunity to the assessee to furnish the necessary details, nobody has attended the proceedings and the assessee has chosen to remain absent from the proceedings. The assessee/appellant, in this case, therefore, has not come to the court with clean hands. 4. Now, coming to the merits of the case, the Assessing Officer, in this case, has made the impugned additions on account of unexplained cash credits, on account of share capital of Rs.2,40,000/- along with share premium of Rs.1,38,60,000/-. It is to be noted that on being asked the assessee to explain in this respect, neither anyone appeared on behalf of the assessee nor furnished any details. Therefore, the I.T.A. No.1039/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Priti Traders Pvt. Ltd 4 Assessing Officer proceeded to frame the assessment considering that the assessee has not furnished any details, documents whatsoever in respect of aforesaid claim of share application and share premium. Therefore, the Assessing Officer, under the circumstances, treated the said amount as unexplained income of the assessee and made the impugned addition by framing ex parte assessment order u/s 144 of the Act. 5. However, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Even before the ld. CIT(A), no one appeared on behalf of the assessee and since neither anyone appeared nor furnished any details, the ld. CIT(A), under the circumstances, upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 6. Before us, no power of attorney was filed by any counsel. However, as observed above, one Ms. Trisha Lahiri had appeared and sought adjournment. However, when she was directed to furnish the identity, details, address of the assessee etc., she disappeared and thereafter, no one has attended the hearing. As observed above, neither any document or details has been furnished before the Assessing Officer nor before the CIT(A) and even before us neither anyone has appeared nor any details furnished, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Assessing Officer and the same is upheld. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed. Kolkata, the 2 nd January, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- [ͬगरȣश अĒवाल /Girish Agrawal] [संजय गग[ /Sanjay Garg] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated:02.01.2023. RS I.T.A. No.1039/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Priti Traders Pvt. Ltd 5 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. M/s Priti Traders Pvt. Ltd 2. ITO, Ward-9(3), Kolkata 3. CIT (A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches