Prismack Biotechnics Limited , Hyderabad V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1126/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7126 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-04-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 01-04-2021
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N SWAPNA
• Assessee Lawyers: C S SUBRAHMANYAM
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 147; 68; 148

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1126/HYD/2019 A.Y. 2010 - 11 PRISMACK BIOTECHNICS LIMITED, HYDERABAD - 082. PAN: AAACN 2000 J VS. DCIT, CIRCLE - 16(4), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI C.S. SUBRAHMANYAM REVENUE BY: SMT. N. SWAPNA, DR DATE OF HEARING: 01/04/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 08 /04/2021 ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 4, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO. 10222/17 - 18/DCIT, CIR - 16(2)/CIT(A) - 4/HYD/19 - 20 , DATED 29/04/2019 PASSED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 AND U/S. 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y.: 20 10 - 11. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SIX GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL AND THEY ARE EXTRACTED HEREIN BELOW FOR REFERENCE: - 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT PROVISO TO SECTION 68 WAS AMENDED FROM A.Y. 2013 - 14 AND HENCE, CANNOT BE 2 APPLIED TO THE FACTS OF THE RELEVANT CASE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 3. THE LD. CIT(A). FAILED TO APPRECIATE T HAT THE RECEIPT OF RS. 40 LAKHS AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY HAD BEEN ADEQUATELY EXPLAINED BY PROVIDING IDENTITY AND PAN OF THE SUBSCRIBER TO THE SHARES. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENABLE THE ASSESSEE TO FILE CONFIRMATION FROM THE SUBSCRIBER BEFORE DECIDING THE APPEAL. THIS IS CONTRARY TO THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 148 WAS BEYOND THE TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED UNDER THE ACT AND HENCE, THE PROCEEDINGS SUBSEQUENT THEREON ARE NULL AND VOID. 6. ANY OTHER GROUND THAT MAY BE RAISED DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS WITH THE PRIOR PERMISSION FROM THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE ME STATING THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT (A) IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD . LD. DR, ON TH E OTHER HAND, VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR AND ARGUED THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER, ON THE GIVEN DATES OF HEARING, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR ITS REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) . THEREFORE THE LD. CIT (A) HAD NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO PASS EX - PARTE ORDER BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HENCE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, I FIND MERIT IN 3 THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR. THE LD. CIT (A) HAD POSTED THE CASE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT( A) ON THE DATES OF HEARING. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT (A) WAS LEFT WITH NO OTHER OPTION EXCEPT TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL EX - PARTE. IN THIS SITUATION, I DO NOT FIND MUCH STRENGTH IN THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. AR. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE PRAYER OF THE LD. AR AS WELL AS THE NATURE OF ADDITION INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL , IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT (A) IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL AFRESH ON MERITS BY PROVIDING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEI NG HEARD. AT THE SAME BREATH, I ALSO HEREBY CAUTION THE ASSESSEE TO PROMPTLY CO - OPERATE BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) IN THE PROCEEDINGS FAILING WHICH THE LD. CIT (A) SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERITS BASED ON THE MAT ERIALS ON THE RECORD. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 08 TH APRIL , 2021. SD/ - ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 08 TH APRIL , 2021 OKK 4 COPY TO: - 1) M/S. PISMACK BIOTECHNICS LIMITED, H.NO. 6 - 3 - 66 - 2, PENT HOUSE, 5 TH FLOOR, SUMIT ENCLAVE, RAJBHAVAN ROAD, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD. 2) DCIT, CIRCLE - 16(2), R.NO. 224, 2 ND FLOOR, IT TOWERS, B BLOCK, HYDERABAD. 3) THE CIT(A) - 4, HYDERABAD. 4) THE PR. CIT - 4, HYDERABAD. 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE