M/s.Minar Alloys & Forgings P. Ltd, Palakkad V. The ACIT, Palakkad

ITA 130/COCH/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2623 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 09-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHANTAM BOSE
• Keywords: Depreciation; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence; Reasonable cause; Assessment record; Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3); 68; 154

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI B P JAIN, AM & GEORGE GEORGE.K, JM ITA NOS.130 & 131/COCH/2015 (ASST YEAR: 2009-10) MINAR ALLOYS & FORGINGS (P) LTD., NIDA, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, PALAKKAD. ( ASSESSEE -APPELLANT) VS (REVENUE -RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AADCM 2687D ASSESSEE BY SHRI SIVADAS CHETTOOR, CA REVENUE BY SHRI SHANTAM BOSE, CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING 09/02/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 09/03/2016 ORDER PER B P JAIN, AM: THESE TWO APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARISE FROM TWO DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A)-V, KOCHI EACH DATED 21/10/2014 FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THERE WAS A DELAY OF 15 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE. THE L D. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS ALONG WITH AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 18 TH FEBRUARY, 2015 WHEREIN THE REASONS FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS HAVE BEEN E XPLAINED. AFTER PERUSAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE, WE FIND THAT THERE EXISTS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEALS IN TIME AND THE REASONS ADVANCED ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 2 BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE DELAY ARE BONA FIDE. BEING SO, WE CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE AND ADMIT THE AP PEALS FOR ADJUDICATION. 3 FIRST OF ALL, WE SHALL TAKE UP THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A. NO. 130/COCH/2015 WHERE THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY TH E CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF SUNDRY CREDITORS U/S. 41(1) OF THE ACT IN GROUND NOS. 2 TO 8 AND AGAINST THE ADDITION OF SHARE CAPITAL IN GROUND NOS. 9 TO 11. GROUND NOS. 1 AND 12 BEING GENERAL IN NATURE, DO NOT REQUIRE ANY ADJUDICATION. 4. THE FACTS IN THE PRESENT CASE AS OBSERVED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER ARE THAT FOR THE AY 2007-08, DISALLOWANCE OF RS.7,39,34,505/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNCONFIRMED SUNDRY CREDITORS WAS MADE AND THE SAME WAS NOT TAKE N INTO THE ACCOUNT BY THE ASSESSEE WHILE FILING RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 200 9-10. IF THE AMOUNT OF UNCONFIRMED SUNDRY CREDITORS OF RS.7,39,34,505/- AS WELL AS THE SUNDRY CREDITORS IN RESPECT OF WHICH CONFIRMATION HAS BEEN FILED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE AY 2009-10 OF RS.2,80,43,449/- IS CONSIDERED, THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.6,96,42,373/- REMAINS AS THE UNCONFIRM ED SUNDRY CREDITS AND THE SAME HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE RETURNED INCOME AS NON E XISTENT LIABILITY U/S. 41(1) OF THE ACT. SIMILARLY, A SUM OF RS.5,27,000/- HAS BEEN ADDED U/S. 68 IN VIEW OF SHARE CAPITAL INTRODUCED, THE SOURCE OF WHICH IS ST ATED TO BE FROM NRIS, HAVE NOT BEEN CONFIRMED BY WAY OF ESTABLISHING THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS. ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 3 5. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE EXPLANATION WHICH WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR REMAND REPORT WHICH WA S SUBMITTED VIDE LETTER DATED 25-09-2014. THE ASSESSEE OBJECTED TO THE SAID REM AND REPORT BUT THE LD. CIT(A) NOT BEING SATISFIED, CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER AND AS PER THE REMAND REPORT, CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS.5,30,48 ,181/-. 6. THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT DECIDE THE ISSUE AS REG ARDS THE ADDITION OF SHARE CAPITAL OF RS.5,27,000/-. 7. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED TH E SUBMISSIONS WHICH WERE MADE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND ALSO WHILE RAISING OBJECT IONS TO THE REMAND REPORT AVAILABLE IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 8. THE LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUS ED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. IT IS PERTINENT TO REPRODUCE THE COPY OF THE REMAND REPOR T DATED 25-09-2014 AS UNDER:- 1. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT FOR TH E ABOVE ASST. YEAR 2009- 10, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE AN ADDITION OF R S.6,96,42,373/- TOWARDS UNCONFIRMED SUNDRY CREDITORS AS ON 31-03-2009 U/S. 41(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AS NON-EXISTENT LIABILITIES, AS BELOW: ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 4 TOTAL AMOUNT OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AS PER ACCOUNTS AS ON 31-03-2009: RS.17,15,68,618 LESS: 1. SUNDRY CREDITORS ALLOWED IN THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT : RS. 2,80,43,449 2. DISALLOWANCE MADE FOR A.Y. 2007-08 : RS. 7,39,34,505 ADDITION MADE UNDER THIS HEAD : RS. 6,96,42,373 2. THE REMAND REPORT CALLED FOR BY THE CIT(A) AFT ER VERIFYING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) BY THE ASSESSEE, IN THE FORM OF CONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM THE CONCERNED PARTIES, IS SUBMITTED AS UNDER:- 3 . THE LIST OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AS ON 31-3-2009 WH ICH ARE CONSIDERED AS SATISFACTORILY CONFIRMED BY THE CONCERNED PARTIES. THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THIS COMES TO RS.11,84,88,405/- (WHICH INCLUDES MAJOR PO RTION OF AMOUNTS DISALLOWED UNDER THE SAME HEAD IN ASST. YEAR 2007-0 8 ALSO). 4. THE LIST OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AS ON 31-3-2009 WHICH ARE NOT CONSIDERED AS SATISFACTORILY CONFIRMED BY THE CONCERNED PARTIES, EVEN NOW, SINCE NO EVIDENCES FILED IN THIS REGARD. THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THIS COMES TO RS.5,30,48,181/-. 5. THE LIST OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AS ON 31-3-2009, THE AMOUNT OF NON EXISTING LIABILITY ADJUSTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE AY 2007-08, PAYMENT MADE TO THE SUNDRY CREDITORS DURING F.Y. 2009-10 ET C. AS PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE CASE OF CONFIRMATION LETTER FILED AS P ER ANNEXURE-I, IN SERIAL NO. 20, IS IN RESPECT OF THE PARTY MAMG TRADERS, THE AM OUNT OUTSTANDING IS RS.9451223/- AND THE ASSESSEE HAD ADJUSTED AN AMOUN T OF RS.8864981/- IN AY 2010-11 TOWARDS THE NON EXISTING LIABILITY FOR T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007- 08. BUT AS ON 31-3-2007, THERE IS NO SUCH BALANCE AT ALL. 7. HENCE, IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE ADDITION MADE AS ABOVE TO THE EXTENT OF RS.5,30,48,181/- MAY BE CONF IRMED IN APPEAL. ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 5 10. IT IS ALSO PERTINENT TO REPRODUCE THE OBJEC TIONS RAISED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO THE SAID REMAND REPORT AS UNDER:- 1. WE OBJECT TO THE PROPOSED AMOUNT OF UNCONFIRMED CREDITORS AT RS.5,30,48,181 SINCE WE SUBMIT THAT THE CREDITORS A RE GENUINE AND THE LIABILITY EXISTS ON THE BALANCE SHEET DATE. THE LI ST IS REPRODUCED IN ANNEXURE- I. 2. WE HAVE REMITTED AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,81,91,927/- TOWARDS THE BALANCES OUTSTANDING IN THE SUNDRY CREDITORS ACCOUNT WHICH C LEARLY SHOWS THAT THE BALANCES ARE OUTSTANDING ON THE BALANCE SHEET DATE. WE ARE ATTACHING THE CONCERNED LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE PARTIES IN SUP PORT OF THE PAYMENTS MADE. PLEASE SEE ANNEXURE-II ALONG WITH THE LEDGE R COPIES FOR REFERENCE. 3. ANNEXURE-III SHOWS THE DETAILS OF THE AMOUNTS OF RS.1,26,59,609/- WHICH REPRESENTS BALANCES ALREADY ASSESSED BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 4. ANNEXURE-IV SHOWS THE DETAILS OF RS.30,26,133. 42 WHICH REPRESENTS THE BALANCES OUTSTANDING AS ON 31-3-2009 WRITTEN OFF IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ALONG WITH LEDGER COPIES. 5. ANNEXURE-V SHOWS THE DETAILS OF RS.6565870/- RE PRESENTING BALANCES OUTSTANDING AS ON 31-3-2009 WRITTEN OFF IN THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 6. ANNEXURE-VI SHOWS AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,26,59,608 .71 WHICH IS STILL EXISTING AS LIABILITY. WE REQUEST YOUR GOODSELF TO PERMIT S UBMISSION OF CONFIRMATION LETTERS FOR WHICH WE REQUIRE TIME. ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 6 11. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE REMAND REPORT OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, IT IS EVIDENT TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAS OBJECTED TO THE ADDITION OF UNCONFIRMED CREDITORS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.5,30,48,181/- SINCE THE CREDITORS WERE CLAIMED TO BE GENUINE AND THE LIABIL ITY EXISTS ON THE BALANCE SHEET DATE WHICH WAS AVAILABLE AS PER ANNEXURE-I S UBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 12. IT WAS ALSO CLAIMED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD R EMITTED RS.1,81,91,927/- TOWARDS BALANCES OUTSTANDING IN THE SUNDRY CREDITORS ACCOUN T AND COPY OF THE LEDGER ACCOUNTS ALONGWITH ANNEXURE-II WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). ALSO SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE BALANCES ALREADY ASS ESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, BALANCES O UTSTANDING AS ON 31-3-2009 WRITTEN OFF IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11, BALANCE S OUTSTANDING WRITTEN OFF DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 AND THE BALANCES STILL EXISTING AS LIABILITY IN ANNEXURE-VI WHICH WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT( A) BUT NO SERIOUS COGNIZANCE WAS TAKEN BY THE LD. CIT(A). 13. AS A MATTER OF FACT, AS PER SECTION 41(1) OF THE ACT, THE PROFIT CHARGEABLE TO TAX IS WHERE AN ALLOWANCE OR DEDUCTION HAS BEEN MAD E IN THE ASSESSMENT FOR ANY YEAR IN RESPECT OF LOSS, EXPENDITURE OR TRADING LIABILITY INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE AND SUBSEQUENTLY DURING ANY PREVIOUS YEAR, THE FIRST MENTIONED PERSON HAS OBTAINED WHETHER IN CASH OR IN ANY OTHER MANNER WHATSOEVER, ANY AMOUNT ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 7 IN RESPECT SUCH LOSS OR EXPENDITURE OR SOME BENEFIT IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRADING LIABILITY BY WAY OF REMISSION OR CESSATION THEREOF, THE AMOUNT OBTAINED BY SUCH PERSON OR THE VALUE OF BENEFIT ACCRUING TO HIM SHAL L BE DEEMED TO BE PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION AND ACCORDINGLY CHARGEABLE TO INCOME-TAX AS THE INCOME OF THAT PREVIOUS YEAR. THEREFORE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, NOTHING HAS BEEN SHOWN BY ANY OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS OBTAINED WHETHER IN CASH OR I N ANY OTHER MANNER WHATSOEVER ANY BENEFIT BY WAY OF REMISSION OR CESSA TION OF SUCH LIABILITY AND ACCORDINGLY, REMISSION OR CESSATION OF SUCH LIABILI TY CANNOT BE DEEMED TO BE PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR. 14. NOTWITHSTANDING, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS REQUIRE D TO DEAL WITH THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IN FACT HAS NOT BEEN D EALT WITH. IN FACT, ON EXAMINATION OF THE FACTS OF EACH YEAR AND THE FOLLO WING YEARS I.E., ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 AND 2011-12, THE ASSESSING OFFICER H AS TO VERIFY WHETHER THE BALANCES HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN WRITTEN OFF OR NOT AND FURTHER VERIFICATION HAS TO BE DONE WHETHER THE ASSESSMENT OF CERTAIN CREDITORS HA VE BEEN MADE IN THE PRECEDING YEAR AND THE LIABILITY OUTSTANDING AS AT THE END OF THE YEAR. IT CAN BE DONE ONLY BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO HAS TO EXAMI NE THE ISSUE AND THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO IS DIRECTED TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE AS DIRECTED HE REINABOVE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AS DIRECTED HEREINABOVE AND COME TO TH E CONCLUSION, IF AT ALL, THERE ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 8 IS ANY AMOUNT WHICH CAN BE INCLUDED U/S. 41(1) OF T HE ACT BUT AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE . ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NOS. 2 TO 8 ON THE ISSUE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICA L PURPOSES. 15. AS REGARDS GROUND NOS. 9 TO 11, THE ISSUE HA S NOT BEEN DECIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED CONFIRMATION LETTERS, SOURCE OF S HARE CAPITAL INTRODUCED, PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER AND DETAILS OF RETURN OF I NCOME FILED BY THE SHAREHOLDERS WHO ARE STATED TO BE NRIS AND THE AMOU NT IS TOTALED TO RS.5,27,000/- BY FOUR PERSONS. IT WAS ARGUED BY T HE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN A POSITION TO SUBMIT THE CO NFIRMATION LETTERS AND OTHER DETAILS OF THE SAID NRIS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER AND IT WILL BE BETTER IF THE MATTER IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER. IT WAS CONCEDED BY THE LD. DR ALSO THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO WILL EXAMINE THE ISSUE BY AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE DE NOVO. ACCORDINGLY , GROUND NOS. 9 TO 11 ARE ALSO ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THUS THE AP PEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A. NO. 130/COCH/2015 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 16. WE SHALL NOW TAKE UP THE APPEAL IN I.T.A. NO .131/COCH/2015 AS UNDER:- 17. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUN DS OF APPEAL:- ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 9 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX (APPEALS)-V, KOCHI, IN SO FAR AS IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE APPELLANT IS OPP OSED TO LAW, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHILE CONSIDERING THE GROUND RAISED VIDE LETTER DAT ED 20-10-2014 IGNORED THE MOST IMPORTANT EVIDENTIARY F ACE I.E. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 2007-08 AND STATED IN PARA 6 & 7 TO THE C ONTRARY. THIS MAKES THE ORDER ILLEGAL FOR NON CONSIDERATION OF IMPORTANT MATERIAL S WHICH HE IS DUTY BOUND TO CONSIDER. THE SAID ORDER OF THE VERY SAME ASSESSING OFFICER CONTAINS FIGURES WHICH ARE AT VARIANCE WITH THE FIGURES IN THE IMPUG NED ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH BY ITSELF INVALIDATED THE RECTIFICATI ON U/S. 154. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) VIOLATED THE PRINCIPLE S OF NATURAL JUSTICE WHILE DECLINING TO GIVE PARTICULARS OF THE FIGURES SHOWN IN HIS PROPOSAL NOTICE SINCE THE APPELLANT SPECIFICALLY PLEADED THAT IT FAILS TO RECONCILE OR UNDERSTAND THE FIGURES. THE APPELLANT ALSO RAISED THE GROUND RATHE R STRONGLY BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) CONVENIENTLY AVOIDE D THE DISCUSSION BY PUTTING THE BLAME ON THE APPELLANT FOR NON SERIOUSN ESS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL ETC. (WHICH AGAIN IS A WRONG STATEMENT AS THE APPEL LANT APPEARED WHENEVER THE APPEALS WERE POSTED AGAIN IS A WRONG STATEMENT AS THE APPELLANT APPEARED WHENEVER THE APPEALS WERE POSTED AND THE I MPUGNED ORDER ITSELF CONTAINS REFERENCES TO THE NOTES FILED IN DETAIL BY THE APPELLANT. 4. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE VERY SAME ORDER W HICH WAS RECTIFIED U/S. 154 HAS BEEN VARIED BY THE VERY SAME ASSESSING OFFICER IN H IS REMAND REPORT DATED 25- 09-2014. THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER I TSELF REQUIRES RECTIFICATION IN VIEW OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) IN THE APPEAL AGAINST ORDER U/S. 143(3) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 5. IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER IT IS SUBMITTED THAT APPROPRIATE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GRANTED. 6) FOR THESE AMONGST OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE RA ISED AND EVIDENCE ADDUCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING IT IS PRAYED THAT JU STICE BE DONE TO THE APPELLANT BY MODIFYING THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 18. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ON V ERIFICATION OF EARLIER YEARS ASSESSMENT RECORDS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THA T THE ACTUAL LOSS TO BE SET OFF AGAINST THIS YEARS INCOME IS ONLY RS.39,30,061/- W HICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 10 EARLIER YEARS LOSSES PENDING: A.Y. BUSINESS DEPRECIATION TOTAL TO BE C/F 2004-05 9321218 5289195 14610413 2005-06 2211447 4821923 7033370 2006-07 32772108 2811122 35583230 44304773 12922240 57227013 SET OFF OF THE ABOVE LOSSES TOWARDS SUBSEQUENT ASSE SSMENT YEARS A.Y. UNDER SECTION. INCOME SET OFF LOSS BALANCE 57227013 2007-08 143(3) 48491464 48491464 8735549 2008-09 143(1) 4805488 4805488 3930061 2009-10 143(3) 81854853 3930061 0 ALTHOUGH, THE TOTAL LOSS ALLOWED TO BE CARRIED FORW ARD DURING THE AY 2009-10, AS PER ASSESSMENT RECORDS, COMES TO RS. 39,30,061/-, T HE ASSESSEE WAS WRONGLY ALLOWED CARRY FORWARD LOSS OF RS.2,41,01,812/-. SI NCE THIS MISTAKE IS HELD TO BE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD, THE SAME WAS PROPOSED TO BE RECTIFIED BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S. 154 ON 9-1-2012 AND FURTHER LETTERS ISS UED ON 18-4-2012, 6-7-2012 AND 6-11-2012. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RESPOND T O THE PROPOSED RECTIFICATION. IN VIEW OF THIS FACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REC TIFIED THE AMOUNT OF CARRY FORWARD LOSS U/S. 154 OF THE ACT. 19. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE DID NOT AD DUCE ANY EVIDENCE DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING AND NO DETAILS OF THE WORKING OF THE CARRIED FORWARD OF LOSS YEAR WISE HAS BEEN PROVIDED AND THE ASSESSEE WAS NO T SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 11 APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RECTIFYING THE MISTAKE. 20 IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PROVID ED ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND THE DETAILS HAVE ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED A ND AGAIN SHALL BE SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THE EXPLANATION TO THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER IF ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IS PROVI DED. 21. THE LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED UPON TH E ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 22. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERU SED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED ADE QUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND IT WILL BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTI CE THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE PROVIDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD SO THA T NECESSARY EVIDENCE AND EXPLANATION CAN BE SUBMITTED AND ACCORDINGLY, THE D ECISION SHOULD BE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, IN THE CIRCUM STANCES AND FACTS OF THE CASE, WE SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER WHO WILL DECIDE THE ISSUE DE NOVO BUT BY PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, ALL THE GROUNDS OF THE ASSE SSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A . NO. 131/COCH/2015 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 12 23. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A. NOS. 130&131/COCH/2015 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09- 03-2016 SD/- SD/- ( GEORGE GEORGE.K) (B P JAIN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE : COCHIN DATED: 9TH MARCH, 2016 GJ COPY TO: 1. MINAR ALLOYS & FORGINGS (P) LTD., NIDA, KANJIKOD E, PALAKKAD . 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -1, PALAKKAD. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-V, KOCHI . 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, THRISSUR. 5. DR/ITAT, COCHIN 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, COCHIN 1.DATE OF DICTATION : 04/03/2016 2.DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED 08/03/2016 BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER OTHER MEMBER: 3.DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR . PS/PS: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER : 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. PS/PS : 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO BENCH CLERK: 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO HEAD CLERK: 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO ASSISTANT REGISTR AR 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER: ITA NO. 130&131/COCH/2015 13