Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata
Sujali Tradelink Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs Ito, Wd-5(1), Kolkata, Kolkata on 29 November, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "D", BENCH KOLKATA
BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM
आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.776/Kol/2016
(िनधारणवष / Assessment Year: 2008-09)
Sujali Tradelink (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata
7/1A, Grant Lane, Ganapati P-7, Chowringhee Square,
Tower, 3rd Floor, Room No.310, Kolkata- 69.
Kolkata 0 700 012.
थायीले खासं ./जीआइआरसं ./PAN/GIR No. :AAKCS 6637 A
(APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT)
Appellant by : Shri Chirag Desai, Staff
Respondent by : Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date of Hearing : 20/11/2017
घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 29/11/2017
आदे श / O R D E R
Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2008-09, is directed against the order passed by the ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata in Appeal No.1566/CIT(A)-2/2014-15,dated 08.02.2016, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 263/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), dated 30.03.2014.
2. At the outset, itself the Ld.AR pointed out the impugned order is an ex parte order and therefore, the assessee could not plead his case before the Ld. CIT(A) , he prayed that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. DR did not have any objection if the matter is remitted before the Ld. CIT(A). We note that the assessment was carried out u/s 263/144 of the Act and the impugned order is an ex parte order. We do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.
SujaliTradelink (P) Ltd.
I T A No . 7 7 6 / K o l / 2 0 1 6 Assessment Year: 2008-09
3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out before us that during the appellate proceedings the notice for hearing was served by ld. CIT(A) to the assessee on 05.02.2016 and ld CIT(A) passed the order on dated 08.02.2016, that is, after three days of the service of notice. The assessee was preparing the written submission which was to be submitted before the ld.CIT(A) but ld CIT(A) passed the order within three days and did not give sufficient time to submit written submission. Therefore, the ld. Counsel prayed the Bench that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
4. Since, the impugned order is an ex parte order, the assessee could not plead his case before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order to the file of the ld. CIT(A). We direct the ld. CIT(A) to pass a speaking order after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Therefore, we allow this appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.
5. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 29/11/2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
(N. V. VASUDEVAN) (DR. A.L.SAINI)
ाियक सद / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
कोलकाता /Kolkata;
िदनांक Dated 29/11/2017
RS,SPS
आदे शकी ितिलिपअ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant - Sujali Tradelink (P) Ltd.
2. थ / The Respondent- I T O , W ard- 5(1) , K o lk at a
3. आयकरआयु (अपील) / The CIT(A), :Kolkata.
4. आयकरआयु / CIT
5. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, कोलकाता/ DR, ITAT, Kolkata
6. गाडफाईल / Guard file.
स ािपत ित //True Copy// By Order Senior Private Secretary, Head of Office/D.D.O, I.T.A.T, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.
Page | 2