IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘B’, KOLKATA [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Hon’ble Vice President & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Hon’ble Judicial Member] [Through Virtual Court] ITA No. 1961/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 DCIT, Central Circle – 2(2), Kolkata..........................................................................Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. VS M/s. Rampuria Industries and Investments Limited...........................................Respondent P10/2, Hungerford Street, Kolkata – 700 017. [PAN: AABCR 6319 P] Appearances by: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the Assessee. Date of concluding the hearing : August 23, 2021 Date of pronouncing the order : November 18, 2021 ORDER PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 16.05.2017 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)- 12, Kolkata arising out of the order dated 28.03.2015 passed by the Ld. DCIT, Central Circle-7(2), Kolkata under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for A.Y. 2012-13 mainly with the following ground: “That on the fact and in the circumstances of the case and under law Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,62,58,857/- made on account of disallowing the net loss on foreign currency transaction without examining the entire facts and circumstances of claim of such loss by the assessee continuously every year, as discussed by the AO in the Assessment Order and without looking into the fact that the loss claimed by the assessee on account of foreign currency transaction, does not match with the loss as computed on the basis of data provided by MCX Stock Exchange Ltd.” 2 ITA No. 1961/Kol/2017 Assessment Year 2012-13 Mr. Rampuria Industries and Investments Ltd. 2. The disallowance of loss of Rs. 2,62,58,857/- incurred by the assessee during the assessment year 2012-13 while dealing in currency derivatives is the subject-matter before us. The Ld. AO made addition of the said amount of net loss in foreign currency transaction mainly on the ground of discrepancy of the amount on the account of foreign currency transaction found in the contract note shown on 26.12.2011 and the ledger account of the assessee in the books of the broker. The loss on foreign currency has ultimately held to be bogus and fabricated. Which was, in turn, deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). 3. At the time of hearing of the instant appeal, the Learned Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted before us that the notice of hearing though issued the same was returned by the postal authority with the remarks “insufficient address returned to sender”. Subsequent notices were again returned by the postal authority with the remark “not known”. However, the Learned Counsel undertakes to produce the directors of those companies before the authorities below and, therefore, prays for a direction for setting aside the issue to the file of the Ld. AO to re-adjudicate the issue upon considering the presence of the directors. He further submitted that relevant documents would also be made available before the authorities below, if required. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue submitted that the assessee has not been able to give any satisfactory compliance before the Ld. AO and thus having no other alternative the ex-parte order was passed by the Ld. AO. According to him the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is also not a speaking order. 5. We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties and we have also perused the relevant materials available on record including the orders passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in ITA No. 3 ITA No. 1961/Kol/2017 Assessment Year 2012-13 Mr. Rampuria Industries and Investments Ltd. 570/Kol/2018 in the matter of Vriddhi Power Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO on the identical issue as submitted by the Ld. AR. We find in the identical situation the Coordinate Bench has been pleased to pass order directing the ld. A.O to adjudicate the matter afresh by providing a further opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. We taking into consideration the entire aspect of the matter, the undertaking given by the Ld. AR for producing the director of the investing companies before the Revenue and particularly upon considering the judgments relied upon, respectfully relying upon the same, find it fit and proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer for deciding the same afresh upon giving an opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case and also taking into consideration the presence of the Directors of the companies and the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter and to pass order in accordance with law. We, further make it clear that the assessee would also cooperate with the Revenue to adjudicate the matter in its proper perspective. Hence assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 18 th November, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- (P.M. Jagtap) (Madhumita Roy) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 18/11/2021 Biswajit, Sr. PS/Tanmay 4 ITA No. 1961/Kol/2017 Assessment Year 2012-13 Mr. Rampuria Industries and Investments Ltd. Copy of order forwarded to: 1. M/s. Rampuria Industries and Investments Ltd., P10/2, Hungerford Street, Kolkata – 700 017. 2. DCIT, Central Circle – 2(2), Kolkata. 3. The CIT(A) 4. The CIT 5. DR True Copy, By order, Sr. Private Secretary/DDO ITAT Kolkata Benches, Kolkata