Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata
Pradip Goswami, Durgapur vs Dcit, Cir-1, Durgapur, Durgapur on 10 February, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,'D' BENCH,KOLKATA
Before : Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Judicial Member and
Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member
ITA No. 749/Kol/2015 A.Y 2008-09
Pradip Goswami Vs. Deputy Commissioner
PAN: ADGPG1741F of Income-tax, Cir-1, Durgapur
[Appellant] [Respondent]
Appellant by : S.N. Ganguli, Advocate, ld.AR/Adj. Petition
Filed/rejected
Respondent by : Md. Ghyas Uddin, JCIT, ld.DR
Date of Hearing : 10-02-2017
Date of Pronouncement : 10-02-2017
ORDER
Per Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, JM:
This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in short [ Ld. CIT(A), Durgapur dated 27-03-2015 on the following grounds:-
1. For that passing of best judgement Appellate order by Ld. CITA is unjust and bad in law since the Appellant did not get any reasonable opportunity of hearing. Hence such order is liable to be set aside.
2. For that estimation and enhancem ent of net profit from reasonable 4.51 % to 8.1 is unjust and arbitrary since it is on estimated basis without any tangible evidences of earning of actual profit by the Appellant.
Hence such estimation is liable to be deleted.
3. For that Appellant had all the Books of accounts and other supporting documents but failed to produce so being beyond his control and possession. So Appellant IS now in a position to substantiate the declared net profit in return by producing relevant documents.
4. For that addition of Rs. 906842/- is unjust and illegal since such amount was on capital introduction account and A.O. can not call for the source of said 2 ITA No. 749/Kol/2015 Pradip Goswami capital introduction. Hence such addition is liable to be deleted.
5. For that Appellant furnished cogent explanation about the source of said amount but was disbelieved in quite arbitrary manner.
6. For that Appellant may modify the grounds.
2. We have perused the case records. We find that at the first appellate stage there was no appearance by the assessee and the order passed ex parte. Therefore, the rights and liabilities were not determined by the CIT(A) since order passed exparte. Therefore, there was no adjudication since no one appeared for the assessee and also for the department. Under these circumstances, we arrive at our considered view for proper determination of rights and liabilities this case should be set aside back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for his fresh adjudication after hearing the parties and direct the assessee that this the final opportunity granted to him for pleading his case and to appear before the CIT(A). After hearing the parties, the CIT(A) may adjudicate the case as per law. We order accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 10-02-2017 Sd/- Sd/-
Dr. Arjun Lal Saini Partha Sarathi Chaudhury Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated 10-02-2017 3 ITA No. 749/Kol/2015 Pradip Goswami Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. Appellant/Assessee: Shri Pradip Goswami 4/3 Millenium Co-
op Housing Complex, Premendra Mitra Bithi, City Centre,Durgapur-713216.
2 Respondent/Department : The Dy. Commissioner Income Tax , Cir-1 Durgapur, Aaykar Bhavan, Aaykar Bithi, City Centre, Durgapur-713216.
3. CIT,
4. CIT(A),
5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata **PP/SPS [ True Copy ] By order, Asstt Registrar