आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “बी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA ी राजेश क ु मार, लेखा सट य एवं ी संजय शमा या यक सद य के सम [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 612/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Manush Commodities Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAFCM 9486 J) Vs. ITO, Ward-15(3), Kolkata Appellant / )अपीलाथ ( Respondent / !"यथ Date of Hearing / स ु नवाई क% त'थ 22.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उ*घोषणा क% त'थ 03.06.2024 For the Appellant/ नधा 0रती क% ओर से Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, A.R For the Respondent/ राज व क% ओर से Shri Abhijit Kundu, 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 24.04.2023 for the AY 2014-15. 2. At the outset the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment as well as the appellate order was framed ex-parte as the assessee could not appear before the authorities below. The assessee has filed certain additional evidences like 2 I.T.A. No.612/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Manush Commodites Pvt. Ltd. bank statements, balance sheet, audited accounts, Form 23AC for AY 2012-13 before the ld. CIT(A) however the same were not admitted and taken into account by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that in the interest of justice and fair play, the case of the assessee may be restored to the file of AO for re-adjudication on merit after taking into account the contentions of the assessee on merit. 3. The Ld. D.R on the other hand strongly objected to the arguments put forward by the Ld. A.R and submitted that despite several opportunities the assessee has failed to appear and finally the case of the assessee was decided ex-parte before the AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. D.R however left the issue to the wisdom of the Bench. 4. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that undisputedly both the authorities below have decided the case ex-parte. So much so the Ld. CIT(A) has not admitted the additional evidences has filed by the assessee under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules comprising bank statement, balance sheet, audited account, auditors report etc. In our opinion, no one should be condemned unheard. In our considered view the assessee needs to be given one more opportunity to present its case on merit before the AO so that the principles of natural justice are satisfied. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the substantial justice should prevail over technicalities. In view of the above, we are inclined to restore the issue to the file of AO with the direction to decide the same after taking into account contentions and evidences which the assessee may file. Simultaneously we direct the assessee to co- operate in the assessment proceedings failing which an adverse view could be taken. 3 I.T.A. No.612/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Manush Commodites Pvt. Ltd. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 6 th June, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma /संजय शमा ) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ु मार) Judicial Member/ या यक सद य Accountant Member/लेखा सद य Dated: 6 th June, 2024 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Manush Commodities pvt. Ltd. 61, Dhananjay Bhatt Acharjee Sarani, Ghospara, Bally, Howrah-711227 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-15(3), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata