M/s Anil Kumar Paik, Kolkata V. D.C.I.T Cir - 8, Kolkata

ITA 1569/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4488 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-10-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 19-10-2020
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DHRUBOJYOTI ROY
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained investment; Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 1569/KOL/2019, A.Y. 20 11-2012 ANIL KUMAR PAIK 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA A BENCH, KOLKATA [VIRTUAL COURT HEARING] BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1569/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-2012 ANIL KUMAR PAIK,................................... ...............................APPELLANT 2B, S.N. ROY ROAD, KOLKATA-700034 [PAN:AFIPP6567R] -VS.- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,................. ...............RESPONDENT CIRCLE-8, KOLKATA, BAMBOO VILLA, 169, A.J.C. BOSE ROAD, KOLKATA-700014 APPEARANCES BY: NONE, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SHRI DHRUBOJYOTI ROY, JCIT , APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : OCTOBER 19, 2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : OCTOBER 19, 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT :- THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-17, KOLKAT A DATED 30.11.2018 PASSED EX-PARTE, WHEREBY HE DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS NOTED THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 33 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TR IBUNAL. IN THIS REGARD, AN APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING CONDONATI ON OF THE SAID DELAY IS PLACED ON RECORD AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE REASONS GI VEN THEREIN, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY OF 33 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL. EVEN THE LD. D.R. HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION IN THIS REGARD. T HE DELAY OF 33 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFO RE THE TRIBUNAL IS ITA NO. 1569/KOL/2019, A.Y. 20 11-2012 ANIL KUMAR PAIK 2 ACCORDINGLY CONDONED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS BEING DISPOSED OF ON MERIT. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS AN INDIVIDUA L, WHO IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT AND GENERAL CO MMISSION AGENT. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION W AS FILED BY HIM ON 31.03.2012 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.30,34,640/- . IN THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) VIDE AN ORDER DATED 19.03.2014, THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DETERMINED BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER AT RS.3,11,77,730/- AFTER MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADDITIO NS:- UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF LAND RS. 15,00,000 / - UNEXPLAINED CREDIT ADVANCES RS.2,09,99,532/ - REMISSION OF TRADING LIABILITY UNDER SECTION 41(1) OF THE ACT RS. 50,13,563/ - UNDISCLOSED RECEIPTS RS. 6,30,000/ - 4. AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT, AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BY THE A SSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND SINCE THERE WAS NO SATISFACTORY CO MPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY HIM FIXING THE SAID APPEAL FOR HEARING FROM TIME TO TIME, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DIS MISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION VIDE HIS APPELLATE ORDER DATED 30.11.2018 PASSED EX-PARTE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEA L BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING FIXED IN THIS CASE TODAY, NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS OBSERVED FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) THAT EVEN THOUGH THE NOTICE S OF HEARING WERE STATED TO BE ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) TO THE ASSESSEE, THERE IS NOTHING TO SHOW THAT THE SAID NOTICES WERE ACTUALLY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. MOREOVER, AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-S ECTION (6) OF SECTION ITA NO. 1569/KOL/2019, A.Y. 20 11-2012 ANIL KUMAR PAIK 3 250, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS REQUIRED TO DISPOSE O F THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE AN ORDER IN WRITING STATING THE POINT S FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DOES NOT CO MPLY WITH THESE REQUIREMENTS. WE, THEREFORE, CONSIDER IT FAIR AND P ROPER AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) EX-PARTE DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESESE FOR NON- PROSECUTION AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO HIM FOR DI SPOSING OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH ON MERIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY PASSING A WELL DISCUSSED AND WELL REASONED ORDER AFTER GIVING PROP ER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASS ESSEE IS DIRECTED TO MAKE DUE COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND EXTEN D ALL THE POSSIBLE COOPERATION IN ORDER TO ENABLE THE LD. CIT(A) TO DI SPOSE OF THE APPEAL AFRESH EXPEDITIOUSLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TRE ATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON OCTOBER 19, 2 020. SD/- SD/- (A.T. VARKEY) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT KOLKATA, THE 19 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020 COPIES TO : (1) ANIL KUMAR PAIK, 2B, S.N. ROY ROAD, KOLKATA-700034 (2) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, KOLKATA, BAMBOO VILLA, 169, A.J.C. BOSE ROAD, KOLKATA-700014 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-17, KOLK ATA, (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.