M/S. KANAK PROJECTS LTD.,KOLKATA V. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA

ITA 1283/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Kanak Projects Limited, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2013-2014. The assessee had initially declared a total income of Rs.6,11,89,350, which was later assessed at Rs.6,77,12,890 after various additions were made by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered the basic facts of the case while dismissing the appeal and thus remanded the case back for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 776868 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2025
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 12-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAPIL MANDAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUJOY SEN
• Keywords: Set aside; Depreciation; Capital expenditure

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1283/KOL/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year : 2013-2014) M/s Kanak Projects Limited, Salarpuria Jajodia @ Co. 7, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700072 Vs DCIT, Circle-8(1), Kolkata PAN No. AABCK 1255 F (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Sujoy Sen, AR रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Kapil Mandal, Addl.CIT-Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 18/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 19 /09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manjunatha G, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 07.04.2025 pertaining to assessment year 2013-2014. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee e-filed its return of income for assessment year 2013-2014 on 26.09.2013 declaring total income at Rs.6,11,89,350/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 09.03.2016 and determined the total income at Rs.6,77,12,890/- by, inter alia, making additions towards disallowance of capital expenditure for Rs.52,58,956/-, rental income not offered to tax at Rs.8,77,945/-, disallowance of excess depreciation at Rs.3,75,000/- and addition towards dividend stripping income u/s.94(7) of the Act for Rs.1,636/-. Printed from counselvise.com ITANo.1283/Kol/2025 2 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee neither appeared nor explained its case, even though the case was posted for hearing on 24.01.2021, 11.04.2022, 23.12.2022, 21.11.2023, 23.10.2024 and 12.02.2025. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte and upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer towards returned income. 4. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)’s order, the assessee is now in further appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that although the assessee sought adjournment of hearing by filing letter but the ld. CIT(A) rejected the adjournment application of the assessee and dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution without considering even basic facts available on record. Therefore, he submitted that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to go to the ld. CIT(A) and explain its case. 6. Ld. Sr. DR for the revenue, on the other hand, fairly agreed that the matter may be remanded back to the file of ld.CIT(A) by giving one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim. 7. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the ld. CIT(A) had given ample opportunities of hearing to the assessee to submit relevant evidence in support of its case. It is also an admitted fact that when the assessee sought adjournment of hearing by filing an application but the ld. CIT(A) rejected Printed from counselvise.com ITANo.1283/Kol/2025 3 the adjournment application filed by the assessee and dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. However, the ld. CIT(A) has disposed off the appeal and upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer towards various disallowance without even considering the basic facts available on record. It is also an admitted fact that even in the case of non-prosecution by the assessee, it is the duty of the appellate authority to decide the appeal on merits on the basis of material available on record. Since the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without considering the basic facts, in our considered view, the matter needs to be set aside to the file of the ld.CIT(A) with a direction to reconsider the issue after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated in the open court on 19/09/2025. Sd/- (SONJOY SARMA) Sd/- (MANJUNATHA G) न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 19/09/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "