M/s. Maa Sarada Air Condition Market, Hooghly V. ITO, Wd-1(3), Hooghly, Hooghly

ITA 457/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 45723514 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO . 4 57 / KOL ./201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 4 - 20 0 5 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA SMC BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 4 57 / KOL / 20 1 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 4 - 20 0 5 M/S/. MAA SARADA AIR CONDITION MARKET, .......... ............. .. .APP ELL ANT 21, N.S. AV ENUE, SERAMPORE, HOOGHLY - 712 201 [PAN : A AKFM 8921 E ] - VS. - INCOME TAX OFFICER , ........................... ................... ... . RESPONDENT WARD - 1(3), HOOGHLY, CHINSUJRAH - 712 101 APPEARANCES BY: N O N E, FOR THE ASSESSEE S MT. RANU BISWAS , J CIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : NOVEMBER 24, 2 01 4 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : NOVEMBER 24 , 201 4 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSE E AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - XXXVI, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO. 11 8 / CIT(A) - XXXVI/KOL/ ITO, WD - 1(3)HG /0 9 - 1 0 DATED 30 .12.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 4 - 0 5 . 2. NONE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SMT. RANU BISWAS, JCIT, SR. D.R. REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF TH E REVENUE. AS NONE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THERE WAS NO ADJOURNMENT LETTER, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISPOSED OF EX - PARTE. I.T.A. NO . 4 57 / KOL ./201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 4 - 20 0 5 PAGE 2 OF 3 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. SR. D.R. THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS AN EX - PARTE ASSESSMENT AND EVEN BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) THERE WAS NO SUBSTANTIAL REPRESENTATION AND ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES HAVE BEEN PRODUCED WHICH THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAVE REFUSED TO ENTERTAIN. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT NOW EVEN THOUGH THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL NONE IS REPRESENTED. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS LIABLE TO BE CONFIRMED. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) SHOWS THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAS REFUSED TO ENTERTAIN THE EVIDENCES PRODUCED BEFORE HIM ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS BARRED FROM PRODUCING ANY EVIDENCE WHICH HE WAS UNABLE TO DO IN THE ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS AS NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRODUCED REGARDING THE REASON FOR IN ABILITY TO PRODUCE THE EVIDENCE IN THE ORIGINAL PROCEEDING. FURTHER A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) SHOWS THAT WITHOUT VERIFYING THE EVIDENCES , THE ADDITION AS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT BE REBUTTED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ISS UES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE - ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO PRODUCE ALL SUCH EVIDENCES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE - ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL AFTER GRANTI NG THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT IT S CASE. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSE E IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 4 TH NOV EMBER , 2014. SD/ - GEORGE MATHAN ( JUDICIAL MEMBER) KOLKATA, THE 2 4 TH D AY OF NOVE MBER , 201 4 I.T.A. NO . 4 57 / KOL ./201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 4 - 20 0 5 PAGE 3 OF 3 COPIES TO : (1) M/S/. MAA SARADA AIR CONDITION MARKET, 21, N.S. AVENUE, SERAMPORE, HOOGHLY - 712 201 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3), HOOGH LY, CHINSUJRAH - 712 101 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( 5 ) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ( 6 ) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASS ISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.