Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7276 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
3 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
25-04-2019
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted
A
Next Hearing Date
-
Assessment Year
2010-2011
Appeal Filed On
01-01-2019
Judgement Text
, , IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . , . , BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I T.A. NO. 01/CHNY/2019 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010-11 M/S. SHARDLOW INDIA LIMITED, HUZUR GARDENS, MADHAVARAM HIGH ROAD, PERAMBUR, CHENNAI 600 011. [PAN:AAACS5048P] VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI. ( /APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA, ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. BHARATH, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 08.04.2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.04.2019 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 16, CHENNAI DATED 24.10.2018 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. BESIDES CHALLENGING ASSESSING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE HAS MAINLY CHALLENGED ON LIMITATION. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ACT IN SHORT] WAS COMPLETED BY ASSESSING 5% OF THE NET SALES AND OTHER INCOME AS TOTAL INCOME OF THE I.T.A. NO.1/CHNY/19 2 ASSESSEE AT .6,12,36,082/- AS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH COMPLETE DETAILS OF PARTICULARS AS CALLED FOR AGAINST THE STATUTORY NOTICES. 3. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL ON LIMITATION. 4. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRONEOUSLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON LIMITATION WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND PRAYED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. 5. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SPECIFIC QUERIES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THEREBY THE LD. CIT(A) VALIDLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL ON LIMITATION AND STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE APPELLATE ORDER. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSEE FILED NIL INCOME RETURN AFTER CLAIMING SET-OFF OF BROUGHT FORWARD LOSS OF .21,20,78,436/-. THE ASSESSEE ALSO ADMITTED THE TAXABLE BOOK PROFITS UNDER SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT AT NIL AFTER CLAIMING SET-OFF BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES OF .2,01,83,241/-. ON SCRUTINY, THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED FOR THE DOCUMENTS, ACCOUNTS AND ANY OTHER EVIDENCE ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE MAY I.T.A. NO.1/CHNY/19 3 REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED. THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES SINCE 27.08.2011 TO 11.03.2013, BUT, THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE FILED PART OF INFORMATION CALLED FOR. DESPITE SIX OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PREFERRED TO FURNISH COMPLETE DETAILS OF ACCOUNTS, VOUCHERS/BILLS/RECEIPTS IN RESPECT OF CLAIM. HENCE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 144 OF THE ACT BY ASSESSING 5% OF NET SALE AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE INCLUDING OTHER INCOMES. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WITH A DELAY OF 186 DAYS. IN THE PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), IT WAS MAINLY STATED THAT DEALING PERSONS HAVE LEFT THE ORGANIZATION AND DUE TO INADEQUATE AND LACK OF PROPER MANPOWER, THERE WERE DIFFICULTIES IN PROPER STORING AND TRACING THE PAPERS AND TAKING ACTION ON TIME. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH THE DETAILS ABOUT (I) NAMES AND DESIGNATIONS OF THE ACCOUNTS DEALING PERSONS WHO LEFT THE ORGANIZATION, (II) WHEN DID THEY LEFT AND (III) EVIDENCE FOR THE SAME. SINCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD, THE DELAY OF 186 IN FILING APPEAL WAS NOT CONDONED AND THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL AS BARRED BY LIMITATION. THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO FURNISH THE DETAILS FOR 186 DAYS DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY DETAILS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WITH REGARD TO NAMES AND DESIGNATIONS OF THE ACCOUNTS DEALING PERSONS WHO LEFT THE ORGANIZATION, ETC. AS HAS BEEN CALLED ON BY THE LD. CIT(A). WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT TO MEET THE ENDS OF NATURAL I.T.A. NO.1/CHNY/19 4 JUSTICE, THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FURNISH COMPLETE DETAILS WITH EVIDENCE AS CALLED FOR BY THE LD. CIT(A) RELATING TO LIMITATION, OTHERWISE, THE APPELLATE ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE CONFIRMED. THUS, WE DIRECT THE LD. CIT(A) TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND TO CONSIDER THE DETAILS AS MAY BE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 25 TH APRIL, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (DUVVURU RL REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 25.04.2019 VM/- /COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT, 2. / RESPONDENT, 3. ( ) /CIT(A), 4. /CIT, 5. /DR & 6. /GF.
Mehul