Lyophilization systems India Private Limited , Hyderabad V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1462/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0147 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 04-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 115JB; 201

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD. BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) ITA NO. 1462 /HYD/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 201 3 - 14 ) M/S. LYOPHILIZATION SYSTEMS INDIA PVT. LTD., 26 & 27, ALEAP INDL. AREA, NEAR PRAGATHINAGAR, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD - 500090 PAN AAACL 8746M VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 16(1), HYDERABAD. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY (D.R) DATE OF HEARING : 09.03 .2021. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 .03. 2021. O R D E R PER S MT. P. MADHAVI DEVI , J.M. : THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE ASST. YEAR 201 3 - 14 FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 4 , HYDERABAD DT. 09.05.2018. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY , ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND SALE OF PHARMACEUTICAL EQUIPMENTS, FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14 ON 22.09.2013 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME 2 ITA NO. 1462/HYD/2018 OF RS.2,12,89,580 UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS AND BOOK PROFIT U/S. 115JB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT'). DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CALL ED FOR INFORMATION BY ISSU ANCE OF NOTICE S AND THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND FILED THE REQUIRED INFORMATION. ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PF OF RS.4,45,369 AND ESI OF RS .55,535 TOTALING TO RS.5,00,904 WAS CREDITED AFTER THE DUE DATE AND GRACE PERIOD. HE OBSERVED THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 36(1)(VA) OF THE ACT, NO DEDUCTION IS ALLOWABLE IF THE EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS PF OR ANY OTHER STAFF WELFARE SCHEME IS CREDITED BY THE EMPLOYER AFTER DUE DATE UNDER THE RELEVANT ACT. HE, ACCORDINGLY, DISALLOWED A SUM OF RS.5,00,904 U/S. 36(1)(VA) OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). SINCE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS A DELAY OF 66 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE HIM AND THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR AND EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR DELAY . THUS, CIT(A) DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL RA ISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : 1. LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. LEARNED CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL AGAINST THE DISALLOWANCE OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION OF PF OF RS. 4,45,369/ - AND ESI OF RS.55,535/ - TOT ALLING RS. 5,00,904/ - . (B) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO NOTE THAT THE AMOUNT WAS PAID BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING THE RETURN. 3 ITA NO. 1462/HYD/2018 (C) LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT FOLLOWING THE ORDERS OF JURISDICTIONAL BENCHES OF !TAT ON THE ISSUE OF PAYMENT OF EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION MADE FOR THE FILING OF THE RETURN ON THE DUE DATE. 3 (A) LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION BY THE APPELLANT . (B) THE ITAT ORDER ON WHICH RELIANCE IS PLACED IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO COURT / TRIBU NAL. (C) HAVING DIRECTED THE AO TO FOLLOW THE CASE LAW MENTIONED IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS, LEARNED CIT(A) CONTRADICTED HERSELF IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS. 3. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE REITERATED THE ARGUNMENTS MADE BEFORE THE LOWER AUT HORITIES. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMANDED TO THE CIT(A) TO EXPLAIN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON - APPEARANCE BEFORE CIT(A) AND ALSO TO EXPLAIN THE DELAY AS WELL AS THE REASONS OF NON - PAYMENT OF EPF AND ESI WIT HIN THE TIME SPECIFIED UNDER THE RELEVANT ACT. THE LD. DR , HOWEVER, OPPOSED THE REMAND TO THE CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR NON - PAYMENT OF PF AND ESI WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED UNDER THE ACT BEFORE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER. 4. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND ALSO THE REASONS FOR NON - PAYMENT OF PF AND ESI WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED UNDER THE RELEVANT ACT. THE ONLY CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE PAYMENT WAS REMITTED BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN. EVEN BEFORE US, NONE APPEARED AT THE TIME OF HEARING THOUGH NOTICE FOR HEARING HAS BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, SINCE WE FIND TH AT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT GIVEN ANY FINDING ON MERIT S AND DISMISSED THE 4 ITA NO. 1462/HYD/2018 ASSESSEE'S APPEAL IN LIMINE ON THE GROUND THAT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND HAS NOT EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPE R TO REMIT THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUE AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO CO - OPERATE WITH THE TAX AUTHORITIES BY APPEARING AND FURNISH ING RELEVANT MATERIAL IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15TH MARCH, 2021. SD/ - SD/ - (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DT. 15TH MARCH, 2021. * REDDY GP COPY TO : 1. M/S. LYOPHILIZATION SYSTEMS INDIA PVT. LTD.,26 & 27, ALEAP INDL. AREA, NEAR PRAGATHINAGAR, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD - 500090 2. DCIT, CIRCLE 16(1), HYDERABAD. 3. PR. C I T - 4, HYDERABAD. 4. CIT(APPEALS) - 4, HYDERABAD. 5. DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR. PVT. SECRETARY, ITAT, HYDERABAD.