आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘‘बी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA ी राजेश क ु मार, लेखा सद य एवं ी संजय शमा या यक सद यके सम [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 419/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Progressive Metals Pvt. Ltd. (PAN:AAFCP 0640 K) Vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Appellant / (अपीलाथ ) Respondent / ( !यथ ) Date of Hearing / स ु नवाई क$ त&थ 10.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उ)घोषणा क$ त&थ 15.11.2022 For the Appellant/ नधा /रती क$ ओर से Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA For the Respondent/ राज व क$ ओर से Shri Sudipto Guha, CITDR ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 12.07.2022 for the AY 2012-13. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the appellate order as well as assessment were framed ex-parte and therefore the case of the assessee was decided without considering the merits of the case. The Ld. A.R. submitted that before the AO, the assessee has some information/details were furnished however 2 I.T.A. No.419/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Progressive Metals Pvt. Ltd. these could not be filed before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. A.R. submitted that the adjournments were sought on 19.03.2022 and 27.12.2021 which were overlooked by the ld CIT(A) resulting into passing of order ex-parte. The ld .A.R also submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the appeals ex-parte as the assessee could not appear on various dates when the Ld. CIT(A) fixed this appeal for hearing. The Ld. Counsel submitted that on two occasions notices sent by the Ld. CIT(A) were not received by the assessee and therefore the appeal of the assessee remained unattended before the Ld. CIT(A). The ld. Counsel of the assessee prayed before the Bench that the assessee may kindly be given one more opportunity to defend its case on merit before the Ld. AO by restoring this appeal to the file of the Ld. AO as before AO also complete details/evidences could not be filed. 3. The Ld. D.R on the other hand strongly objected the prayers of the Ld. A.R by submitting that despite several opportunities granted, the assessee did not appear and therefore the said request of the counsel of the assessee may kindly be dismissed. 4. After hearing the rival parties and perusing the material on record, we observe that the assessee’s appeal was decided ex-parte when the assessee failed to turn up on the various dates fixed for hearings. We note that on couple of times the assessee sought adjournments but somehow , the applications filed by the assessee escaped the notice by the ld CIT(A) copies whereof are placed on records before us. Therefore , in order to meet the ends of justice, the assessee deserves to be given one more opportunity to defend its case on merits before the AO as even the AO has not decided the issues on merits. Accordingly we restore the appeal to the file of the Ld. AO for the reasons cited above with the directions to decide the same on merits by affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing. Simultaneously we also direct the assessee to cooperate in the disposal of this appeal. 3 I.T.A. No.419/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Progressive Metals Pvt. Ltd. 6. In the result, all the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 15 th November, 2022 Sd/- Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma /संजय शमा ) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ु मार) Judicial Member/ या यक सद य Accountant Member/लेखा सद य Dated: 15 th November, 2022 SB, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Progressive Metals Pvt. Ltd., 23A, N.S.Road, 7 th Floor, Suite No. 30, Kolkata-700001. 2. Respondent – DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata