M/s. Beach Mineral Co. P. Ltd., CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

CO 27/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2823 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 6 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 03-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 14-08-2019
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S BHARATHCITD R
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : CHENNAI , , BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & S HRI S.JAYARAMAN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.2001/CHNY/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2008-09 M/S.BEACH MINERAL COMPANY LTD., 32/2,BMC HOUSE,HALLS ROAD, EGMORE, CHENNAI 600 008. VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI. [PAN AADCB 3450 D ] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) C.O . NO.27/CHNY/2013 ( ITA NO.2113/CHNY/2012 ) / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2008-09 M/S.BEACH MINERAL COMPANY LTD., 32/2,BMC HOUSE,HALLS ROAD, EGMORE, CHENNAI 600 008. VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI. [PAN AADCB 3450 D] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) ! ' / APPELLANT BY : MR.S.SRIDHAR,ADVOCATE $%! ' /RESPONDENT BY : MR.S.BHARATH,CIT,D.R ' ) / DATE OF HEARING : 03 - 09 - 201 9 ' ) / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03 - 09 - 201 9 ITA NO.2001/CHNY/2014 C.O. NO.27/CHNY/2013 :- 2 -: / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2001/CHNY/2014 IS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A)(C)-II, CHENNAI IN IT A NO.340/13-14 DATED 28.03.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. CROS S OBJECTION NO.27/CHNY/2013 ARISING APPEAL NO.2113/CHNY/2012 IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) IX, CHENNA I IN ITA NO.50/11- 12 DATED 08.08.2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. S INCE THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IS COMMON IN THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE AS WELL AS CROSS OBJECTIONS, WE HEARD THE APPEAL AND CROSS OBJECTION S TOGETHER AND DISPOSE OF THE SAME BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. SHRI S.SRIDHAR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE AND SHRI S.BHARATH REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE . 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO.2001/CHNY/14 IS TAKEN UP FOR DISPOSAL FIRST. THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 24.07.2014. DEFECT NOTICE DATED 25.07.2014 HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE INTIMATI NG FOLLOWING DEFECT. (I)COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.143(3) NOT FILED IN DUPLICATE. ITA NO.2001/CHNY/2014 C.O. NO.27/CHNY/2013 :- 3 -: THE APPEAL WAS POSTED FOR HEARINGS ON 27.10.2014, 1 2.10.2015, 09.06.2015, 13.10.2015, 07.12.2015, 14.01.2016, 25. 02.2016, 24.08.2016, 27.12.2018, 28.01.2019, 31.01.2019, 14. 02.2019, 21.05.2019, 14.08.2019. THE APPEAL WAS SUBSEQUENTL Y ADJOURNED TO TODAY, THAT IS 03.09.2019 ON WHICH DATE ALSO THE DEFECT IN RESPECT OF NON-FILING OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.1 43(3) OF THE ACT HAS NOT BEEN CURED. 4. CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STA NDS DISMISSED FOR DEFECTS UNCURED BY APPLYING THE PRINC IPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PRASAD PRODUCTIONS P. LTD. VS. INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUN AL [1997] 226 ITR 778 (MAD). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED IN LIMINIE ON ACCOUNT OF DEFECTS UNCURED. 6. NOW, WE PROCEED TO DEAL WITH THE ASSESSEES CROSS O BJECTIONS NO.27/CHNY/2013 ARISING APPEAL NO.2113/CHNY/2012. 7. THE CROSS OBJECTION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSES SEE ON 05.02.2013. DEFECT NOTICE DATED 02.05.2013 HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE INTIMATING FOLLOWING DEFECT. ITA NO.2001/CHNY/2014 C.O. NO.27/CHNY/2013 :- 4 -: (I) CROSS OBJECTION IS PRIMA FACIE TIME BARRED BY 3 3 DAYS. NOT FILED CONDONATION PETITION/AFFIDAVIT. THE CROSS OBJECTION WAS POSTED FOR HEARINGS ON 05.0 3.2013, 06.05.2013, 26.06.2013, 27.10.2014, 12.10.2015, 09. 06.2015, 13.10.2015, 07.12.2015, 14.01.2016, 25.02.2016, 24. 08.2016, 27.12.2018, 28.01.2019, 31.01.2019, 11.02.2019, 14. 02.2019, 21.05.2019, 14.08.2019. THE APPEAL WAS SUBSEQUENTL Y ADJOURNED TO TODAY, THAT IS 03.09.2019 ON WHICH DATE ALSO THE DEFECT POINTED OUT IN RESPECT OF NON-FILING OF AFFIDAVIT FOR CONDO NATION OF DELAY HAS NOT BEEN CURED. 8. IT IS WELL KNOWN FACT THAT AN AFFIDAVIT IS A DE CLARATION OF FACTS MADE IN WRITING AND SWORN BEFORE A PERSON HAVING TH E AUTHORITY TO ADMINISTER OATH. ALL AFFIDAVITS ARE VERIFIED STATEM ENTS AND PRINTED ON STAMP PAPERS OF DIFFERENT DENOMINATIONS. ACCORDI NG TO THE INDIAN LAWS, AN AFFIDAVIT CAN BE USED TO PROVE A FA CT IN A COURT OF LAW PROVIDED THE COURT ORDERS IT. 8.1 FURTHER, RULE-10 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TR IBUNAL RULES, 1963 PROVIDES FOR FILING OF AFFIDAVITS WHEREIN IT I S SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED THAT: WHERE A FACT WHICH CANNOT BE BORNE OUT BY, OR IS CONTRARY TO, THE RECORD IS ALLEGED, IT SHALL BE STA TED ITA NO.2001/CHNY/2014 C.O. NO.27/CHNY/2013 :- 5 -: CLEARLY AND CONCISELY AND SUPPORTED BY A DULY SWORN AFFIDAVIT. 9. CONSEQUENTLY, THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED FOR DEFECTS UNCURED BY APPLYING TH E PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PRASAD PRODUCTIONS P. LTD. VS. INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [1997] 226 ITR 778 (MAD). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINIE ON ACCOUNT OF DEFECT UNCURED. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF DEFECTS UNCURED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 03 RD SEPTEMBER, 2019, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) 3 /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) 4 3 / JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI - / DATED: 03 RD SEPTEMBER, 2019. K S SUNDARAM ' $/0 10 / COPY TO: 1 . ! / APPELLANT 3. 2 () / CIT(A) 5. 0 $5 / DR 2. $%! / RESPONDENT 4. 2 / CIT 6. / GF