ALTRAN TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI V. DCIT, CORP. CIRCLE-1, COIMBATORE

ITA 806/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Altran Technologies India Private Limited appealing against an order from the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2015-16. The primary issue in the appeal was the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) regarding discrepancies in turnover figures as compared to service tax returns. The assessee argued that their rights to natural justice were violated as they were not given a proper opportunity to be heard by the CIT(A). The Tribunal noted the assessee's reasons for non-compliance with previous hearings and decided to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 716929 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 20-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C. YAMUNA
• Assessee Lawyers: N.V. LAKSHMI
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ’सी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिर्क सदस्य एवं श्री अयिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.806/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Altran Technologies India Private Limited, 2nd Floor, A Block, A-Wing, IT-1 & IT-2, Airoli Knowledge Park, Thane-Belapur Road, Navi Mumbai, Airoli Thane, Thane, Maharashtra-400 708. [PAN: AADCP1380N] Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-1, Coimbatore. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Ms.N.V.Lakshmi, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Mrs.C.Yamuna, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 17.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 20.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 / 1072148564(1) dated 14.01.2025 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment year 2015-16. The reference to the word “Act” in this order hereinafter shall mean the Income Tax Act, 1961 as amended from time to time. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 806 /Chny/2025 Page - 2 - of 3 2.0 At the outset, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that it has filed revised Form-36 in the name of Altran Technologies India Private Limited. It was stated that the name change was necessitated on account of pending proceeding with NCLT. It was requested that the same may be taken on record for the purpose of this adjudication. The request of the assessee has been noted for necessary action. 3.0 The Ld.Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the only issue in this appeal is regarding the addition by the Ld.AO on account of variations noted in the turnover figures qua the service tax returns. The Ld.Counsel has argued that its rights under natural justice has been violated by the Ld.CIT(A) in as much as it has not been given due opportunity of being heard. It was urged that the assessee is in possession of all the evidences to exhibit that no case of any addition is made out in its case. It was accordingly requested that the matter may kindly be considered to be set aside to the Ld.CIT(A) for readjudication after giving due opportunity of being heard. 4.0 Per contra, the Ld.DR relied upon the order of lower authorities. 5.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. We have noted that the Ld.CIT(A) has given opportunities to the assessee which were not complied. We are however satisfied with the reasons put forth by the assessee for its non- compliance. We are conscious of the fact that no litigant benefits from Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 806 /Chny/2025 Page - 3 - of 3 non-prosecution of its case. Be that as it may be, we are of the view that in the interest of the justice, it would be appropriate to remit the case to the Ld.CIT(A) for readjudication. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and direct him to readjudicate the matter in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Ld.CIT(A) may consider for calling for a remand report from the Ld.AO, if deemed necessary in the case. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are therefore allowed for statistical purposes. 6.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 20th , Aug-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- (एबी टी. वर्की) (ABY T VARKEY) न्याधयक सदस्य / Judicial Member Sd/- (अधमताभ शुक्ला) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 20th , Aug-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem. 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF Printed from counselvise.com "