Kalash Trade Chem Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Conclusion: The case of assessee was remanded back to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication due to the failure to address the issues under Section 148 with respect to limitation and service of the notice.
Held: Assessee challenged the order passed by the CIT(A),National Faceless Appeal Centre ( NFAC ), for the Assessment Year 2013-14. Assessee raised several grounds, arguing that CIT(A) upheld an addition of ₹50,74,150 under Section 68 read with Section 115BBE without considering documents submitted and passed an ex-parte order. It was claimed that the notice under Section 148 was time-barred, reasons recorded under Section 147 were vague, and proper show-cause notices were not issued, violating Section 144B. The reassessment was challenged as illegal due to the absence of a mandatory notice under Section 143(2) and lack of a draft assessment order. The addition under Section 68 was disputed as no credit appeared in the books, and the application of Section 115BBE was contested. Penalty proceedings and interest charged under Sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D were also disputed, asserting no defaults. It was held that assessee challenged the limitation and service of the notice but did not respond to further notices, leading to an ex-parte order. CIT(A) failed to address the issue under Section 148. Tribunal remanded the case to CIT(A) to review the validity of the notice and the merits, instructing the assessee to cooperate and avoid unnecessary delays.
