Chennai Pressings P Ltd., CHENNAI V. ACIT Corporate Circle 1(3), CHENNAI

ITA 1192/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2723 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N ARJUNRAJ C A

Judgement Text

, SMC , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C SMC BENCH : CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1192/CHNY/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S.CHENNAI PRESSINGS P LTD ., 289/1,SIDCO INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, NORTH PHASE,AMBATTUR, CHENNAI 600 098. VS. THE ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI. [PAN AAACC 4617 N ] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR.N.ARJUNRAJ,C.A /RESPONDENT BY : MR.B.SAGADEVAN, JCIT,D.R ! '# / DATE OF HEARING : 25 - 1 0 - 201 8 $% ! '# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25 - 1 0 - 201 8 / O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-3,CHENNAI IN ITA NO.82/10- 11/A-1 DATED 30.01.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. ITA NO.1192/CHNY/2018 :- 2 -: 2. SHRI N.ARJUNRAJ REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE AS SESSEE AND SHRI B.SAGADEVAN REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE R EVENUE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A DOMESTIC COMPANY, WHICH IS DOING BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURE OF AUTOMOBILE PARTS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO D EDUCTION U/S.80-IB OF THE ACT. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT WHILE FILING T HE RETURN OF INCOME, ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S.80-IB OF THE ACT, BU T THE SAME WAS DENIED ON THE GROUND THAT THE AUDIT REPORT IN FORM 10CCB WAS NOT FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. CONSEQUENTLY , NOTICE U/S.148 WAS ISSUED ON 25.02.2010 TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ITS RESPONSE TO TREAT THE ORIGINAL RETURN AS THE ONE FILED IN RE SPONSE TO NOTICE U/S.148 OF THE ACT AND IT HAD ALSO APPENDED FORM NO .10CCB ALONG WITH THE LETTER TO ENFORCE THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U /S.80-IB OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSMENT CAME TO BE COMPLETED WHEREIN IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ONLY THE FORM NO.3CA AND FORM NO .3CD AND AUDIT REPORT IN FORM NO.10CCB WAS NOT PART OF THE DOCUMEN TS ATTACHED. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ANOTHE R LETTER ALONG WITH FORM 10CCB. HOWEVER, THE SAME WAS ERRONEOUS AND SO FAR AS THE NATURE OF CLAIM IN COLUMN NO.7 OF FORM NO.10CCB WAS MENTION AS SEC.80-IA OF THE ACT INSTEAD OF SEC.80-IB OF THE AC T. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT ON APPEAL, LD.CIT(A) HAD CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ITA NO.1192/CHNY/2018 :- 3 -: LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WAS A FURTHER SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOW FILING THE CORRECT FORM-10CCB BEFORE THE TRIBUN AL. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT ASSESSEE MAY BE GRANTED THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTI ON U/S.80-IB OF THE ACT. 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.D.R SUBMITTED THAT IF THE REC TIFIED AUDIT REPORT IN FORM NO. 10CCB IS FILED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, THE S AME MUST BE FILED BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION. 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. ADMIT TEDLY, IN THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNA L, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A COPY OF RECTIFIED AUDIT REPORT IN FORM NO. 10CCB DATED 23.10.2018. THIS BEING SO, IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT-1 VS.A KS ALLOYS (P.) LTD., REPORTED IN [2012] 18 TAXMANN.COM 25(MAD.) AND ALSO TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME CO URT IN THE CASE OF GOETZE (INDIA) LTD., VS. CIT REPORTED IN [2006] 284 ITR 323(SC), THE ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE- ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL PRODUCE THE NECESSARY AUDIT REPORT IN FORM NO. 10CCB BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING O FFICER FOR HIS EXAMINATION. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL EXAMIN E THE SAME AND RE- ITA NO.1192/CHNY/2018 :- 4 -: ADJUDICATE THE SAME ALLOWANCE OF THE CLAIM U/S.80-I B OF THE ACT BY TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE RECTIFIED FORM 10CCB. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PA RTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 25 TH OCTOBER, 2018, AT CHENNAI. SD/ - ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ! ' / JUDICIAL MEMBER & / CHENNAI ' / DATED: 25 TH OCTOBER, 2018. K S SUNDARAM (!)* +*! / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. ,!- . / CIT(A) 5. */0!1 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. ,! / CIT 6. 023 / GF