Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata
Jas Equipment & Engineers Pvt. Ltd., ... vs Acit, Cir-2, Durgapur, Durgapur on 23 August, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH : KOLKATA
[Before Hon'ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM ]
I.T.A No. 259/Kol/2015
Assessment Year : 2010-11
JAS Equipment & Engineers Pvt. Ltd. -vs.- A.C.I.T., Cirlce-2,
Durgpur Durgapur
[PAN : AABCJ 9126 E]
(Appellant) (Respondent)
For the Appellant : Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA
For the Respondent : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT
Date of Hearing : 14.08.2017.
Date of Pronouncement : 23.08.2017.
ORDER
Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM
This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 23.12.2014 of CIT- (A)-Durgapur relating to A.Y.2010-11.
2. The Assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of engineering goods. For A.Y.2010-11 the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs.99,99,152/-. An order of assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) dated 31.03.2013 was passed by the AO determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.2,15,78,214/-. The AO made several additions to the total income of the assessee in the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Act.
3. Aggrieved by various additions made by the AO the assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). The first hearing before CIT(A) was on 16.10.2014. The assessee sought adjournment on the ground that the Authorised Representative of the assessee was sick and the case was adjourned to 11.11.2014. On the said date i.e., 11.11.2014, on the very 2 ITA No.259/Kol/2015 Jas Equipment & Engineers Pvt. Ltd.
A.Yr.2010-11 same ground the proceedings were adjourned to18.11.2014. Thereafter the appeal was adjourned and fixed for hearing on 11.12.2014. The assessee sought adjournment on the ground that the Authorised Representative was not available and the case was adjourned to 19.12.2014. On 19.12.2014 again on the same ground of non availability of the Authorised Representative an adjournment was sought. The request was refused by CIT(A) and the appeal of the assessee was decided exparte confirming the order of AO.
4. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal.
5. Ground No.1 raised by the assessee before the Tribunal reads as follows :-
" (a) That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the appellant sought for adjournments from time to time since competent representative to handle the appeal could not be appointed till then.
(b) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is wrong in rejecting adjournment petition dated 19.12.2014 and thereby deciding the appeal on exparte view.
(c) That on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing assessee's appeal on exparte view without appreciating the constrain and without allowing reasonable, adequate and effective opportunity of hearing."
6. At the time of hearing of this appeal the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before us that one Shri A.N.Basu Roy Choudhury, Managing Director of the assessee, who was looking after the tax matter was sick and was being treated for kidney related ailments at the relevant point of time when the proceedings before CIT(A) were in progress. Due to his sickness he was not able to coordinate with the Authorised Representative. It was also brought to our notice that between 16.10.2014 and 19.12.2014, when the proceedings before CIT(A) were in progress, the Managing Director was sick and therefore the proceedings before CIT(A) could not be properly represented. It was submitted that there was lack of proper opportunity afforded to the 2 3 ITA No.259/Kol/2015 Jas Equipment & Engineers Pvt. Ltd.
A.Yr.2010-11 assessee by CIT(A). The ld. Counsel for the assessee also brought to our notice that ultimately the managing director died in March, 2017. The ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee should be afforded an opportunity of putting forth his case before CIT(A) and therefore the order of CIT(A) should be set aside and the issues raised before the CIT(A) should be directed to be decided by CIT(A)on merits.
7. We have given a very careful consideration to the submissions of the ld. Counsel for the assessee and are of the view that there was lack of proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee by CIT(A). Accepting the submissions of the ld. Counsel for the assessee, we set aside the order of CIT(A) and remand the issue raised by the Assessee before the CIT(A) to be decided afresh by the CIT(A) on merits after affording the assessee proper opportunity of being heard.
8. In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 23.08.2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
[J.Sudhakar Reddy] [ N.V.Vasudevan ]
Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated : 23.08.2017.
[RG PS]
Copy of the order forwarded to:
1.Jas Equipment & Engineers Pvt. Ltd., S-12, Durgapur Industrial Estate, Durgapur- 713212.
2. A.C.I.T., Circle-2, Durgapur.
3. CIT(A)-Durgapur C.I.T.-Durgapur.
5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.
True copy By Order Senior Private Secretary Head of office/D.D.O., ITAT, Kolkata Benches 3 4 ITA No.259/Kol/2015 Jas Equipment & Engineers Pvt. Ltd.
A.Yr.2010-11 4