Hotel Parbat Pvt. Ltd., Malda V. DCIT, Malda Circle, Malda, Malda

ITA 83/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4591 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M K BISWAS
• Assessee Lawyers: V N PUROHIT
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 6

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 83/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA C(SMC) BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 83 /KOL/ 2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 HOTEL PARBAT PVT. LIMITED,......................... ............................APPELLANT JOY PLAZA, SHOPPING COMPLEX, N.H. 34, PRANTAPALLY, RATHBARI, P.O. & DIST. MALDA-732 101 [PAN : AABCH 7623 N] -VS.- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,................. ...............RESPONDENT CIRCLE-MALDA, MALDA APPEARANCES BY: SHRI V.N. PUROHIT, FCA, FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI M.K. BISWAS, JCIT, D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : JULY 12, 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JULY 14, 2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), JALPAIGURI DA TED 12.09.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. AS NOTED, AT THE OUTSET, THERE IS A DELAY OF 21 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION SEEKING CONDONATI ON OF THE SAID DELAY AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE REASONS GIVEN THEREIN, I AM SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LD. D.R. HAS N OT ALSO RAISED ANY OBJECTION IN THIS REGARD. I, THEREFORE, CONDONE THE SAID DELAY AND PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT. I.T.A. NO. 83/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 2 OF 4 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS A COMPANY, W HICH IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING HOTEL. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FILED BY IT ON 15.11.2007 DECLARI NG TOTAL INCOME AT NIL. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AS SESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND OTHER SUPPORTING D OCUMENTS DESPITE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY AFFORDED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, HAD NO OPTION BUT TO COMPLETE T HE ASSESSMENT TO THE BEST OF HIS JUDGMENT UNDER SECTION 144. IN THE ASSE SSMENT SO COMPLETED VIDE AN ORDER DATED 26.11.2009, SUNDRY CREDITORS AM OUNTING TO RS.19,05,839/- AND SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AMOUNTIN G TO RS.10,00,000/- WERE ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE TOTAL IN COME OF THE ASSESSEE BY TREATING THE SAME AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM UN DISCLOSED SOURCES. 4. AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R UNDER SECTION 143(3) /144, AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSE E BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEE DINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WERE FORWARDED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE LATERS COMMENTS. AS MENTIONED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN H IS IMPUGNED ORDER, REMINDERS WERE ALSO ISSUED BY HIM TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR SUBMITTING THE REMAND REPORT EXPEDITIOUSLY. THE ASSESSEE ALSO DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ON THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING . THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THEREFORE, PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL OF TH E ASSESSEE EX PARTE AND DISMISSED THE SAME BY PASSING THE ORDER AS UNDER:- (1) THIS APPEAL IS FILED AGAINST THE ORDER U/S 143 (3)/144 DATED 26.11.2009 ASSESSING THE INCOME AT RS.22,33,9 40/- AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF NIL. (2) STATEMENT OF FACTS- IN THE INITIAL HEARINGS THE ASSESSEE FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WHICH WERE FORWARDED TO A O FOR COMMENTS. THEREAFTER, REMINDERS WERE ISSUED TO THE AO FOR EXPEDITING THE SUBMISSION OF REMAND REPORT. SEV ERAL OTHER DATES WERE FIXED FOR HEARING THE APPEAL WHICH WERE NOT ATTENDED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT AVAIL THE OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN TO ARGUE THE APPEAL OR POIN T OUT DEFECTS IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. I.T.A. NO. 83/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 3 OF 4 (3) CONCLUSION- IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, IT IS PRESU MED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE GRO UNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT THE APPEAL IS FILED BEYOND THE TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED AND NO REASONS FOR LATE FILING ARE MENTIONED IN THE APPEAL. APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD. COUN SEL FOR THE ASSESSSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT EVEN THOUGH WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE SAME HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY HIM WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE E BY HIS IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED EX PARTE. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SA ID WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WERE DULY FORWARDED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE LATERS COMMENTS BUT IT IS NOT CLEAR FROM THE I MPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AS TO WHETHER THE REMAND REPORT WAS AC TUALLY FILED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SEC TION 6 OF SECTION 250, IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) TO DISPOSE O F THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY AN ORDER PASSED IN WRITING STATING THER EIN THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE DECISION. A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEAL S) CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE SAME IS NOT PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN A CCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) AND EVEN THE LD. D.R. HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO DISPUTE OR CONTROVERT THIS POSITION. I, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE SAID ORDER AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) F OR DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH ON MERIT AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TRE ATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JULY 14, 2016 . SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 14 TH DAY OF JULY, 2016 I.T.A. NO. 83/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 PAGE 4 OF 4 COPIES TO : (1) M/S. HOTEL PARBAT PVT. LIMITED, JOY PLAZA, SHOPPING COMPLEX, N.H. 34, PRANTAPALLY, RATHBARI, P.O. & DIST. MALDA-732 101 (2) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-MALDA, MALDA (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), JALPAIGU RI (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- , (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.