YASH MINING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA V. I.T.O., WARD - 4(1), KOLKATA

ITA 2524/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Yash Mining Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)) that upheld an addition of Rs. 75,00,000 to the assessee's income under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, alleging receipt of accommodation entry from Balaji Trading Co. The assessee had initially not appeared before the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A), leading to ex parte decisions. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to present its case and thus remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 28759 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Accommodation entries
• Section: 250; 139(1)

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.2524/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Yash Mining Pvt. Ltd.…... .……………………………………..….……….Appellant 71 Canning Street 5th Floor, Room No.512A, Kol-1. [PAN: AAACY4989R] vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata...……..............................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Miraj D Shah, AR, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT- Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : February 27, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : February 28, 2025 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against an order dated 30.03.2024 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. At the outset, the Registry has informed that there is a delay of 194 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee filed an application for condonation of delay stating reasons for such delay. After considering the application, we find reasonable cause and the delay was not intentional. We, therefore, condone the delay in filing the appeal and adjudicate the appeal on merits of the case. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 u/s 139(1) of the Act declaring total income of Rs.31,470/-. In the case of the assessee, an information was received that the assessee company was one of the I.T.A. No.2524/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Yash Mining Pvt. Ltd 2 beneficiaries of the accommodation entries and had received an amount of Rs.75,00,000/- from paper/shell companies during the F.Y 2011-12 which appeared to have escaped the assessment. Accordingly, notice u/s 147 of the Act was issued to the assessee. However, the assessee did not turn up before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer passed an order u/s 144/147 of the Act by making an addition of Rs.75,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act alleging that the assessee has received accommodation entry from Balaji Trading Co. 4. Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the assessment order. However, before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not turn up. The ld. CIT(A) had no other option but to decide the appeal by upholding the order of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed the present appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR filed an affidavit stating the reason for non-appearance before the ld. CIT(A) and prayed before the Bench that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to re-examine the issue after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. On the other hand, the ld. DR objected to such prayer made by the assessee stating that since the assessee has not complied with the notices issued by the authority below, therefore, such prayer at this stage may not be entertained and the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed in limine. 7. We, after hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, find that both the orders of the authorities below were passed ex parte without considering the merits of the case. The assessee could not represent its case properly before the authorities I.T.A. No.2524/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Yash Mining Pvt. Ltd 3 below. In the interests of justice and fair play, we, therefore, deem it necessary to remand the whole issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer to re-examine the issues after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply to the notices issued during the remand proceedings without any fail. 8. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 28th February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated: 28.02.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Yash Mining Pvt. Ltd 2. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches "