Shree Raghunath Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata V. ITO, WD-3(2), KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 1254/KOL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1793 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S P CHOUDHURY
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Depreciation; Opportunity of being heard; Unabsorbed depreciation
• Section: 234B; 148

Judgement Text

1 I.T.A. NOS. 1254-1255/KOL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1999-2000 & 2000-2001 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA A BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 1254 & 1255/KOL./2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1999-2000 & 2010-2001 SHREE RAGHUNATH STEEL INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.,......... ...................APPELLANT 2, CLIVE GHAT STREET, 6 TH FLOOR, KOLKATA-700 001 [PAN: AAICS 1426 M] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ ..................................RESPONDENT WARD-3(2), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA-700 069 APPEARANCES BY: SHRI S.P. CHOUDHURY, ADVOCATE & SHRI SOUMITRA CHOUD HURY, ADVOCATE, FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI ARINDAM BHATTACHARJEE, ADDITIONAL CIT, D.R., F OR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : DECEMBER 14, 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JANUARY 12, 2018 O R D E R PER SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTE D AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS) BOTH DATED 21.03.2016 PASSED EX- PARTE DISMISSING THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000 AND 2000-01 . 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS A COMPANY, W HICH IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING OF STEEL PRODUCTS. TH E RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000 WAS FILED BY IT ON 23.12. 1999 DECLARING A LOSS 2 I.T.A. NOS. 1254-1255/KOL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1999-2000 & 2000-2001 OF RS.23,04,640/-. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 20 00-01 WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 31.11.2000 DECLARING ITS TOTAL INCOME A T NIL. BOTH THESE RETURNS WERE INITIALLY PROCESSED BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER UNDER SECTION 143(1)(A) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSMENTS WERE, HOWEVER, REOPENED BY HIM AND AFTER RECORDING THE REASONS, NO TICES UNDER SECTION 148 WERE ISSUED BY HIM TO THE ASSESSEE FOR BOTH THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. VIDE LETTER DATED 22.12.2005 FILED B EFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT FOR A.Y. 2000- 01 WAS CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSEE BY RAISING ITS OBJECTION. THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER, HOWEVER, DID NOT FIND MERIT IN THE SAID OBJECTIONS AND OVERRULIN G THE SAME, HE PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT FOR A.Y. 2000- 01 VIDE AN ORDER DATED 31.03.2006 PASSED UNDER SECTION 147/143(3) OF THE ACT. IN THE ASSESSMENT SO COMPLETED, GROSS TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DETERMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT RS.32,90,157 /- AFTER MAKING CERTAIN ADDITIONS AND AFTER ALLOWING DEDUCTION UNDE R CHAPTER VIA AND SET OFF OF UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM THE EARLIER YEARS, THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DETERMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT NIL. THE BOOK PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY FOR A.Y. 2000-01 UNDER SECTION 115JA WAS COMPUTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT RS.32,82,657/- AND DEMAND WAS RAISED ON ACCOUNT OF TAX PAYABLE IN RESPECT OF THE TOTAL INCOME AS DETERMINED UNDER SECTION 115JA OF THE ACT AFTER GIVING CREDIT FOR TDS AND CHARGING INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B AN D 234C OF THE ACT. SIMILARLY THE REASSESSMENT FOR A.Y. 2009-10 WAS COM PUTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE AN ORDER DATED 19.12.2006 PA SSED UNDER SECTION 147/143(3) OF THE ACT WHEREBY THE TOTAL INCOME OF T HE ASSESSEE WAS DETERMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT RS.2,44,539/ - AFTER MAKING CERTAIN ADDITIONS. 3. AGAINST THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER UNDER SECTION 147/143(3) FOR BOTH THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION, APPEALS WERE PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEAL S) AND SINCE THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE NO TICES ISSUED BY HIM FIXING THE SAID APPEALS FOR HEARING FROM TIME TO TI ME, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) 3 I.T.A. NOS. 1254-1255/KOL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1999-2000 & 2000-2001 PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED EX-PARTE . HE HELD THAT THERE WAS A FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO OFFER ANY EXPLANATION IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUNDS RAI SED IN THE APPEALS DESPITE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY AND ACCORDINGLY DISMIS SED THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THESE APPEALS BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AN D ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN GROUNDS N O. 1 TO 3, A PRELIMINARY ISSUE IS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLEN GING THE EX-PARTE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ON THE GROUND THAT REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN BY THE LD . CIT(APPEALS) TO THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS REGARD, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE NOTICES OF HEARINGS CLAIMED TO BE SENT BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WERE NEVER RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THIS WAS TH E REASON FOR THE NON- APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEA LS) DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE HIM. IT WAS ALSO SU BMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAS NOT DECIDED THE ISSUES RAISED BY T HE ASSESSEE IN ITS APPEALS FOR BOTH THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION ON M ERIT AS REQUIRED BY SUB-SECTION 6 OF SECTION 250. AS PER THE SAID PROVI SION, THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DISMISSING THE APPEALS OF THE ASSE SSEE HAS TO BE IN WRITING AND SHOULD STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATI ON, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE DECISION. A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) SHOWS THAT THE SAME DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUB-SECTION 6 OF SECTION 250 AN D THIS POSITION CLEARLY EVIDENT FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(APP EALS) IS NOT DISPUTED EVEN BY THE LD. D.R. HE HAS ALSO NOT RAISED ANY OBJ ECTION FOR SENDING THE MATTERS BACK TO THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOR FRESH CONS IDERATION KEEPING IN VIEW ALL THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. W E, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) EX-PARTE AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO HIM FOR DISPOSING OF THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH ON MERIT IN COMPLIANCE WITH SUB-SECTION 6 OF SECTIO N 250 AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 4 I.T.A. NOS. 1254-1255/KOL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1999-2000 & 2000-2001 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2018. SD/- SD/- (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 12 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2018 COPIES TO : (1) SHREE RAGHUNATH STEEL INDUSTRIES (P) LTD., 2, CLIVE GHAT STREET, 6 TH FLOOR, KOLKATA-700 001 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA-700 069 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-1, KOLKAT A; (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- , (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, HEAD OF OFFICE/DDO, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.