Crown Plasto Pack, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1277/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6472 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B SAGADEVAN
• Assessee Lawyers: D ANAND
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

, .. , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , SMC B BENCH, CHENNAI . , BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1277/MDS/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13) M/S. CROWN PLASTO PACK, 8, SAHIB HAZARATH STREET, CHENNAI 600 001. VS THE ACIT, NON CORPORATE WARD - 11, CHENNAI . PAN: AADFC7303D ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B. SAGADEVAN, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 31.07.2017 !' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.08.2017 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS)-13, CHENNAI DATED 23.03.2017 IN ITA NO.27/CIT(A)-13/201 2-13 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 PASSED U/S.143(3) OF THE AC T. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL:- 1. THE ORDER OF CIT (A) CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF LE ARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IS AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND PRINCIPLES OF NATURE JUSTICE. 2 ITA NO.1277/MDS/2017 2. THE LEARNED CIT (A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FAC T THAT THE CAPITAL INTRODUCED BY THE PARTNERS WAS DULY EXPLAIN ED AND THE RETURNS OF THE PARTNERS CLEARLY EXPLAINED THIS INVE STMENT. THE LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MA DE IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM WHEN THIS WAS FULLY EXPLAINED BY THE PARTNER. THE LEARNED CIT (A) AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER FAILE D TO APPRECIATE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE INCO ME TAX ACT 1961 WHICH REQUIRES ONLY PROVING THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND IN NO CIRCUMSTANCES THE APPELLANT C AN BE ASKED TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF HIS CREDITORS. 3. THE LEARNED CIT (A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FAC T THAT THE INTEREST WAS FULLY PAID TO VARIOUS BANKS AND NBFCS AND THAT IT WAS NOT AN ACCRUAL ENTRY QUALIFYING FOR DISALLOWANC E U/S 40(A) (IA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. MOREOVER THE APPELLANT WOULD FURTHER LIKE TO EMPHASIZE THE FACT THAT THESE NBFCS ARE REG ISTERED AND GOVERNED BY THE POLICIES OF RBI AND HENCE THE PROVI SION OF SECTION 40 (A) (IA) WOULD NOT APPLY. 4. THE LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDI TIONS U/S. 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT ITS NORMAL IN ANY TRADE TO TAKE ADVANCES FROM PARTIES A GAINST THE ORDERS BOOKED. MOREOVER THE CASH ADVANCES WERE FROM VARIOUS CUSTOMERS WHEREIN THE ADVANCE AMOUNT FROM A PARTICU LAR CUSTOMER DID NOT EXCEED RS 20,000/-. THUS NOT VIOLA TING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 269 SS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1 961. 3 ITA NO.1277/MDS/2017 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD.AR SUBMITTED ON THE EARLIE R OCCASION BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR DUE TO UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES AND HENCE THE LD.CIT(A) HAS PASSED AN EX-PARTE ORDER. THE LD.AR FURTHER PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A FAIR CASE TO SUCCEED AND THEREFORE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY B E PROVIDED BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). THE LD.DR VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD.AR AND PRAYED FOR SUSTAINING T HE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A). 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. THOUGH, I DONT APPRECIATE TH E BEHAVIOR OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) ON THE EARLIER OCCASION, HOWEVER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I HER EBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A) THEREBY GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. I FURTHER CAUTION THE ASSESSEE TO CO- OPERATE WITH THE LD.CIT(A) IN HIS PROCEEDINGS IN OR DER TO EXPEDITE HIS ORDER, FAILING WHICH THE LD.CIT(A) IS AT LIBERT Y TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERIT BASED ON THE MATERIALS BEFORE HIM. 4 ITA NO.1277/MDS/2017 5. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 01 ST AUGUST, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #$ /CHENNAI, %& /DATED 01 ST AUGUST, 2017 JR & () *) /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. - ( )/CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. )./ 0 /DR 6. /1 /GF