Ecospace Suppliers Private Limited , Kolkata V. ITO, Ward - 9(2), Kolkata , Kolkata

ITA 583/KOL/2018

AI Insights

Ecospace Suppliers Private Limited appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) - 7, Kolkata, which confirmed the addition of Rs.13,78,00,000 to the assessee's income for the Assessment Year 2012-13. This addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to unexplained share application money received by the assessee. The Tribunal noted the absence of the assessee's representation and failure to provide necessary details at both the assessment and appellate stages, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136128 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 8 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 14-12-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 68; 142(1); 250; 143(2)

Judgement Text

। आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ᭠यायपीठ, कोलकाता । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ecospace Suppliers Private Limited 156, Cotton Street 3 rd Floor Kolkata - 700007 PAN : AACCE9872D Vs I.T.O., Ward - 9(2), Kolkata सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 15/12/2022 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 16/12/2022 आदेश/O R D E R PER SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT: The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) - 7, Kolkata (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”) dt. 21/02/2018, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act’), for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The solitary grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.13,78,00,000/-, which was added by the Assessing Officer with the aid of Section 68 of the Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 15/01/2013 declaring total income as “NIL”. Its case was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee. On scrutiny of the accounts, it revealed to the Assessing Officer that the assessee has received fresh share application money of Rs.13,78,00,000/-. In response to the notice of hearing u/s 142(1) of the Act, अपीलाथᱮ/ (Appellant) ᮧ᭜ यथᱮ/ (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri G. Hukugha Sema, CIT D/R I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ecospace Suppliers Private Limited 2 no one appeared before the Assessing Officer nor any detail was submitted. Hence, an ex-parte order based on the best judgment of the Assessing Officer was passed making addition of this amount. 4. Before the ld. First Appellate Authority, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee and the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. 5. In response to the notice of hearing no one has come present on behalf of the assessee. Sub-section (6) of Section 250 of the Act, contemplates that the ld. CIT(A) would state the points of disputes and thereafter record reasons on these points. In other words, appeal of the assessee ought to have been disposed off on merits instead of dismissal for want of prosecution. After apprising ourselves with the conduct of the assessee regarding non-submission of any material before the Assessing Officer or before the ld. CIT(A), we tried to take the exercise ourselves for deciding the appeal on merits by treating it as if it is a first appeal but we fail to appreciate the true character of the transactions. Even the assessee did not file anything before any of the authorities. It merely completed the formality of filing its appeal. In other words, it has not been prosecuting the litigation. 6. We have perused the statement on facts filed before the ld. First Appellate Authority along with Form No. 35 but, even in this statement of facts, the assessee has simply pointed out the details of the companies who are share applicants have been submitted before the Registrar of Companies, Kolkata and such details can be retrieved from there. In our opinion, the assessee failed to discharge the onus put upon it by virtue of Section 68 of the Act where it is required to establish the identity of the share applicants, their creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions. I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ecospace Suppliers Private Limited 3 It failed to fulfill these conditions. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this appeal of the assessee and accordingly, it is dismissed. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 16 th December, 2022 at Kolkata. Sd/- Sd/- (GIRISH AGRAWAL) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Kolkata, Dated 16/12/2022 *SC SrPs आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुᲦ / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ)अपील (/ The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कोलकाता/DR,ITAT, Kolkata, 6. गाडᭅ फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Kolkata