Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata
Visheshwar Nath (Huf), Kolkata vs Ito, Ward 32(2), Kolkata, Kolkata on 7 July, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "D", BENCH KOLKATA
BEFORE SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM
आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.303/Kol/2017
( नधा रणवष / Assessment Year : 2010-11
Visheshwar Nath (HUF) Vs. ITO, W ard 32(2), 10B,
21, Camac Street, Kolkata-700071. Middleton Row, Kolkata-
700071
थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /PAN/GIR No. : AABHV 9742 B
(अपीलाथ /Assessee) .. ( यथ / Respondent)
नधा रतीक ओरसे /Assessee by : Shri Sanjib Barbora, FCA
राज वक ओरसे /Revenue by : Shri Arindam Bhattacharya, Addl.
CIT Sr. DR.
सन
ु वाईक तार ख/ Date of Hearing : 16/06/2017
घोषणाक तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/ 07/2017
आ दे श / O R D E R
Per Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM:
The captioned appeal filed by the Assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2010-11, is directed against the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Kolkata in Appeal No. 466/CIT(A)-9/Wd-32(2)/2014-15/Kol, dated 30.03.2016, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), dated 11.03.2014.
2 ITA No.303/17VisheshwarNath (HUF)
2. Brief facts of the case qua the assessee are that in the instant case, the assessment proceedings were reopened by issuing notices u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 28.03.2013 after recording the proper reasons. During the reassessment proceedings none appeared before the Ld.AO,therefore, the Ld. AO has passed the ex parte order by making various additions u/s 144 of the Act.
3. Aggrieved from the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee, because nobody appeared before him i.e. during the appellate proceedings neither the assessee nor his authorized representative attended the office of the Ld. CIT(A). Although, the Ld. CIT(A) issued several notices for hearing dated, 16.03.2015, 26.06.2015, 30.07.2015, 13.08.2015, 28.10.2015, 16.12.2015, 22.01.2016 and 10.03.2016. There was no compliance of these notices, on the part of the assessee, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer.
4. Not being satisfied with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is an appeal before us and has taken the following grounds of appeal:
1. Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without granting an opportunity of hearing. Even the notice of hearing was not served. Despite that an ex parte order has been passed confirming the A.O.'s action. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A)'s order may be set aside.
2. Without prejudice to the ground above the Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with the grounds of appeal before him and erred in passing an ex parte order which is not on merits.3 ITA No.303/17
VisheshwarNath (HUF)
5. The Ld. Counsel for theassessee has submitted that the assessee under consideration is VisheshwarNath (HUF) and the Karta of this HUF, Shri VisheshwarNath had died on 7th July, 2010. The assessee has produced death certificate. After the death of the Karta of HUF there were legal fighting among the co-parceners i.e., the Members of the HUF were fighting about the family matters therefore, nobody could attend before the Ld. Assessing Officer and before the Ld. CIT(A). On 26.07.2014 the successor of VisheshwarNath (HUF), Mr. VirendraNath wrote a letter to the Assessing Officer to provide him certified copy of the assessment order, and after getting the certified copy of the assessment order the successor of the assessee came to know about the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel, therefore, prayed the Bench to remit the case back to the file of the Assessing Officer, in order to make the fresh assessment.
6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the Revenue did not object the proposition canvassed by the ld. Counsel for the assessee about sending back the saidmatter to the file of the Assessing Officer to make the fresh assessment.
7. Having heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record, we notice that in the interest of natural justice, this issue requires a fresh examination at the end of the Assessing Officer, as the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has explained before us that because of death of Karta of HUF,there was fighting among the members of the HUF family and therefore, the assessee neither attended the office of the Assessing Officer nor the office of the Ld. CIT(A). We also direct the assessee to appear before the Assessing Officer on 31.07.2017 and submit the necessary details as required 4 ITA No.303/17 VisheshwarNath (HUF) by the AO. This is to ensure that the assessee should participate in the assessment proceedings. We allow this appeal for statistical purposes.
8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 07/ 07/2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
(A.T. VARKEY) (DR. A.L.SAINI)
या यक सद य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
कोलकाता/Kolkata; $दनांक Dated 07/ 07/2017
SB, Sr.PS.
आ दे शक त ल पअ े षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Assessee- Visheshwar Nath (HUF)
2. यथ / The Respondent.-ITO Ward 32(2), Kolkata
3. आयकरआय( ु त(अपील) / The CIT(A), :Kolkata
4. आयकरआयु(त/ CIT
5. )वभागीय त न,ध, आयकरअपील यअ,धकरण, कोलकाता/ DR, ITAT, Kolkata
6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.
स या)पत त //True Copy// By Order
Senior Private Secretary
Head of Office/D.D.O,'
I.T.A.T., Kolkata Benches,
Kolkata