R P INFRA PROJECTS,DELHI V. ACIT, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

ITA 156/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves R P Infra Projects, a joint venture between S&P Infrastructure Developers Pvt. Ltd. and Aarpee Infra Project Pvt. Ltd., which was awarded a contract for road widening and strengthening on NH-105 in Madhubani, Bihar. The assessee filed a return declaring income from business and other sources, which was later contested by the Assessing Officer, leading to an increased assessment. The CIT(A) initially dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance by the assessee, which was attributed to non-receipt of email notices. The tribunal found the ex-parte order by CIT(A) to be inappropriate without a proper hearing and remanded the case for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711919 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.156/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 R P Infra Projects…...……………………..…………………....Appellant 907, New Delhi House, 27-Barakhamba Road, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001. [PAN: ALOPA0369B] vs. ACIT, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi………………….…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Sanjay Joshi, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri S. B. chakraborthy, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : July 17, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : July 22, 2025 आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.11.2024 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The assessee is a joint venture (JV) between S&P Infrastructure Developers Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi) holding a 70% share, and Aarpee Infra Project Pvt. Ltd. (Jalpaiguri, West Bengal) holding a 30% share. The JV was awarded a contract for the execution of the remaining work of widening and strengthening of the single-lane carriageway to a double- lane carriageway from KM 28.00 to KM 53.76 on NH-105, under a special project scheme in Madhubani, Bihar. The total project value was Rs.130,06,07,964/-, awarded on 23rd June 2016. The assessee filed its Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.156/KOl/2025 R P Infra Projects 2 return of income for AY 2018-19 on 3rd November 2018, declaring a total income of Rs.1,88,59,580 from business and other sources. Subsequently a notice under Section 143(2) was issued to the assessee, directing it to produce evidence in support of the contract and fees received. Further, a notice under Section 142(1) was issued, requiring the assessee to submit its accounts and supporting documents. The Assessing Officer viewed that an amount of Rs.150,00,000/- was not incurred for the purpose of business, made an addition and passed the assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Sections 143(3A) and 143(3B) on 12th March 2021, determining the total income at Rs.3,38,59,584/-. 3. The assessee challenged the assessment before the CIT(A). However, due to non-compliance on various hearing dates, the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order, dismissing the appeal without dealing with the merits of the case. 4. Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee is in appeal before this tribunal. At the time of hearing Id AR contended that the non- appearance before the CIT(A) was due to non-receipt of notices sent via email. It was submitted that the assessee is a law-abiding joint venture engaged in executing various government contracts. Since the order was passed ex parte without a proper hearing, the assessee requested another opportunity to present its case and substantiate its claims before the CIT(A). 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. However, the DR did not object to the matter being remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 6. We, after hearing the rival submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, find that in the present case, the impugned order passed by ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order due to the Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.156/KOl/2025 R P Infra Projects 3 absence of compliance by the assessee and find that the issues were not discussed or addressed in detail in the CIT(A)'s order. We therefore the interest of justice and faire play deemed it appropriate to remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for a fresh decision. The assessee is directed to respond to the notices and cooperate with the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). 7. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 22nd July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated: 22.07.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3.CIT (A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "