M/s Poddar Dewki Limited, Kolkata V. ITO, Wd-5(2), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1510/KOL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4200 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-07-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MD GHYAS UDDIN JCIT LD
• Assessee Lawyers: BRIJESH KUMAR SINGH LD
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,C BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE : SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1510/KOL/2016 A.Y 2009-10 M/S. PODDAR DEWKI LTD VS. I.T.O WARD 5 (2), KOLKATA PAN: AABCP 7795B [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] APPELLANT BY : SHRI BRIJESH KUMAR SINGH, ADVOCATE, LD.AR RESPONDENT BY : MD. GHYAS UDDIN, JCIT , LD.DR DATE OF HEARING : 21-11-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25-11-2016 ORDER SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 09-05-2016 PASSED U/S. 250 OF THE I.T A CT 1961 BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), 2, KOLKATA FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL IS TO BE DECIDED AS TO WHETHER THE CIT-A JUSTIFIED IN PASSING THE EX-PARTE ORDER WITHOUT AFF ORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY AND DERIVING ITS INCO ME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT NIL THROUGH ONLINE ON 30-09-2009. SUBSEQUENTLY, UND ER SCRUTINY NOTICES U/S. 143(2) AND 142(1) WERE ISSUED. IN RESPONSE TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE REPRESENTED ITS CASE THROUGH ITS AR. THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE FILED DOCUMENTS TO EXPLAIN THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE AO DETERMINED THE TOTAL ITA NO. 1510/KOL/2016 M/S. PODDAR DEWKI LTD 2 INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 13,44,180/- AND TO TH AT EFFECT AN ORDER U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 28-12-2011 WAS PASSED. 4. AGGRIEVED BY SUCH ORDER OF THE AO, THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE SAME BEFORE THE CIT-A. ACCORDING TO THE CIT-A, THE FIRST NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 11/12/2015 FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING O N 21/12/2015. BUT THE SAID NOTICE WAS RETURNED WITH AN ENDORSEMENT UNKN OWN. AGAIN ANOTHER NOTICE DATED 10/03/2016 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE F IXING THE HEARING ON 31- 03-2016, WHICH WAS AGAIN RETURNED WITH SAME ENDORSE MENT UNKNOWN . LIKEWISE THE CIT-A ISSUED ANOTHER NOTICE DATED 01/0 4/2016, WHICH WAS ALSO RETUNED WITH THE SAME ENDORSEMENT UNKNOWN . THE C IT-A WAS OF THE VIEW THAT ALL THE SAID THREE NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE AD DRESS AS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN FORM NO.35 AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON APPEARANCE BEFORE HIM BY PASSING AN EX-PARTE OR DER. 5. AGGRIEVED BY SUCH EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE CIT-A, N OW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. THE LD. AR SUBMITS THAT THE OFFICE OF ASSESSEE I S LOCATED IN A HUGE BUILDING. IT IS A MISTAKE OF ASSESSEE IN NOT MENTIO NING THE ROOM NO. IN WHICH ASSESSEES OFFICE IS LOCATED. TO THAT EFFECT AN AFF IDAVIT DATED 24-10-2016 WAS FILED, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE STATED NON SERVICE OF NOTICE AND OFFERED AN UNDERTAKING TO PROSECUTE ITS CASE BEFORE THE CIT-A, IF AN OPPORTUNITY IS GIVEN. 7. THE LD.DR SUBMITS THAT THE CIT-A HAS AFFORDED AM PLE OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE. THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT-A SUGGE STS ITSELF THAT THE CIT- A HAS ISSUED THREE NOTICES TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ALL NOTICES WERE RETURNED UNSERVED WITH THE SAME ENDORSEMENT UNKNOWN . THE LD. DR FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THE CIT-A ISSUED NOTICES TO ASSESSEES ADDRESS AS PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND URGED TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF ASSE SSEE. ITA NO. 1510/KOL/2016 M/S. PODDAR DEWKI LTD 3 8. HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE CIT-A HAS GIVEN THE ASSESSEE AMPLE OPPORTUNITIES OF HEARINGS AS RIGHTLY BEEN POINTED OUT BY THE LD.DR. HOWEVER, THE LD. AR SUBMITS THAT THE MISTAKE IS ON THE PART OF THE ASSE SSEE IN NOT PROVIDING THE ROOM NO. IN WHICH ASSESSEES OFFICE IS LOCATED. FR OM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS FROM THE APPELLATE ORDER, IT IS OBSERVE D THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN TWO ADDRESSES, ONE IS AS PRESENT ADDRESS AND OTHER SHOWN AS OLD ADDRESS. IN BOTH THE ADDRESSES THE ROOM NUMBER OF A SSESSEES OFFICE WAS NOT PROVIDED AND ONLY NO. OF BUILDING WAS PROVIDED. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE SUBMISSIONS OF ASSESSEE, UNDERTAKING AS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE SAID AFFIDAVIT AND IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAND THE CASE TO THE FILE OF THE CI T-A IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED NOT TO SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT BEFORE THE CIT-A IN PROSECUTING ITS CASE. THE ASSESSEE SHA LL BE AT LIBERTY TO FILE REQUISITE EVIDENCES, IF ANY, TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CA SE/CLAIM. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED AS STATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH NOVEMBER, 2016 SD/- SD/- M. BALAGANESH S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 25-11-2016 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: M/S. PODDAR DEWKI LIMITED 4 FA IRLIE PLACE, GROUND FLOOR, KOLKATA-1. 2 RESPONDENT/DEPARTMENT : INCOME TAX OFFICER W 5(2), AAYKAR BHAWAN, P-7 CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA-69. 3. CIT, 4. CIT(A), 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA **PP/SPS [ TRUE COPY] BY ORDER, ASSTT REGISTRAR