GURUNANAK DEVELOPERS INDIA P. LTD., MUMBAI V. DCIT WARD-10(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1512/MUM/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Gurunanak Developers India P. Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 22, Mumbai, which had dismissed their earlier appeal as non-admissible due to non-payment of the required tax. The original assessment had significantly increased the assessee's declared income, leading to a higher tax demand. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Mumbai, after considering the submissions and the detailed paper book provided by the assessee, decided to remit the case back to the CIT - A with specific directions regarding the payment of admitted taxes and subsequent admission of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 131296 (ITAT-undefined)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-11-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: Mumbai
• Next Hearing Date: 06-09-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 16-07-2022
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. M/s Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (P) Ltd (2012) 349 ITR 336
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRA BHA T K UM GUP TA
• Assessee Lawyers: R I TI KA AGAR WA L
• Section: 144; 43; 22

Judgement Text

Page | 1 ITA No.1512/Mum/2020 Gurunanak Developers India P. Ltd; A.Y. 11-12 I N THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM I TA No. 1 51 2/M um /2 020 (Ass es sme nt Ye ar 2 0 11-12) Guru nan a k De vel op e rs I nd ia P. L td. Plo t No. 9/ 10/ 11, Gard en L a ne, L .B.S. Gh at ko par ( W ), Mum ba i-40 0 0 86 Vs. DCI T Ward 10(2) R oom No. 43 2, 4 th F l oor, Aay k ar Bh ava n M.K. roa d, Mum ba i-40 0 0 20 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AACCG5435C Assessee by : MS. R i ti ka Agar wa l, AR Revenue by : Shri Pra bha t K um ar Gup ta, DR Da te of he ari ng: 07.0 9.20 22 Date of pronouncement : 16.1 1.20 22 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by assessee/appellant for assessment year 2011 – 12 against the appellate order passed by the Commissioner of income tax (appeal) 22, Mumbai dated 13/2/2020 wherein the appeal filed by the assessee on 24/4/2014 against the assessment order passed u/s 144 of the income tax act 1961 (the act) dated 27/3/2014 by the Deputy Commissioner of income tax – 10 (2), Mumbai (the learned AO) was dismissed in limine being non-admissible. 02. Assessee raised following grounds of appeal “1. BECAUSE, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in refusing to consider the 'corrected computation of income' filed by the appellant before the assessing officer, in due exercise of its right to do so in view of decision of hon'ble Page | 2 ITA No.1512/Mum/2020 Gurunanak Developers India P. Ltd; A.Y. 11-12 Bombay High Court in the case CIT vs. M/s Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (P) Ltd reported in (2012) 349 ITR 336. 2. BECAUSE, the tax demand as attributed to corrected 'computation of income' (filed before the Assessing Officer himself during the course of assessment proceedings) represented 'undisputed demand' within the meaning of sub- section(4)(a) of section 249 and the ld.CIT(A) on a due and correct interpretation and appreciation of law, the ld.CIT(A) should have admitted the appeal for due adjudication as per provision of law. 3. BECAUSE, the ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that taxes paid by the appellant, aggregating Rs. 1,01,90,940/- was sufficient to cover the 'undisputed tax liability' as had arisen out of the corrected computation of income filed by the appellant. 4. BECAUSE, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal in limine by mis application of the provisions of section 249(4)(a) of the Act. 5. BECAUSE, in any case and on a reasonable interpretation of provision of law, the ld.CIT(A) should have admitted the appeal for due adjudication of various claims as had been made in corrected 'computation of income' as had been filed during the course of assessment proceedings, as per particulars given in Annexure-I hereto.” 03. Brief facts of the case shows that that assessee is a company engaged in the business of construction and development of residential projects. It filed its return of income on 29/9/2011 declaring a total income of ₹ 56,801,752/– the return of income was picked up for scrutiny by issue of notice u/s 143 (2) of the act. The assessment proceedings culminated into an assessment order passed u/s 144 of the income tax act 1961 on 27/3/2014 where the total income of the assessee is assessed at ₹ 262,804,950/–. Page | 3 ITA No.1512/Mum/2020 Gurunanak Developers India P. Ltd; A.Y. 11-12 04. Assessee aggrieved with the assessment order preferred an appeal before the learned CIT – A Mumbai, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed as not admitted as assessee has not paid the taxes due on its admitted income and incomes of provisions of Section 249 (4) of the income tax act, the appeal can neither be admitted nor be maintained regardless of the fact that appellant had made submission on the ground of appeal raised in hearings have taken place on various dates. Accordingly the appeal of the assessee was dismissed as not admitted. Assessee aggrieved with that order has preferred appeal before us. 05. The learned authorized representative has filed detailed paper book containing 353 pages on the merits of the issue. The learned departmental representative vehemently submitted that when the appeal was not admitted before the learned CIT – A for the non-payment of the tax, the assessee could not have filed an appeal before the ITAT. Therefore the appeal of the assessee deserves to be dismissed. 06. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. Admittedly the assessee has failed to pay admitted tax and therefore the learned CIT – A is correct in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by not admitting the same. 07. Before us, the learned authorized representative submitted that now the assessee is ready to pay the taxes as admitted in the return of income or as per the revised computation of income submitted before the learned assessing officer. In view of the submission of the learned authorized representative we remit the appeal back to the file of the learned CIT – A with a direction that if the assessee pays the admitted tax, the learned CIT – A is directed to admit the appeal of the assessee on payment of such taxes and then decide the issue on the merits of the case. The onus would be on the assessee to pay the admitted tax as per the satisfaction of the learned CIT – A. 08. In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with above direction. Order pronounced in the open court on 16.11.2022. Page | 4 ITA No.1512/Mum/2020 Gurunanak Developers India P. Ltd; A.Y. 11-12 Sd/- Sd/- (SAND EE P SI NGH K AR HAI L) (PR ASH ANT M AH AR I S HI ) (JUDI CI AL ME MBER ) (ACCOUNTAN T M EMB ER ) Mumbai, Dated: 16.11.2022 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai