M/s Trinova Holdings Pvt Ltd , Bangalore V. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 1550/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3048 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDDAPPAJI R N BENGALURU
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Bad and doubtful debts
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I TA NO. 1550/BANG/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013 - 14 M/S. TRINOVA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., NO.B-1, 62/5/D, BEGUR ROAD, BOMMANAHALLI, BANGALORE 560 068. PAN: AAACT 1853H VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(1)(1), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SIDDAPPAJI R.N., ADDL.CIT(DR)(ITAT), BENGALURU . RE SPONDENT BY : SHR I RAVI SHANKAR, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 05 .0 9 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24. 09.2018 O R D E R PER N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08.02.2018 OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-VII, BENGALURU RELATING TO ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINE SS OF MANUFACTURE OF TRADING. FOR THE AY 2013-14, THE AS SESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF NIL. AN ORDER OF ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 [THE ACT] DATED 28.03 .2016 WAS PASSED BY THE AO DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME OF ASSESSEE AT RS.1,39,99,330. THE TOTAL INCOME WAS DETERMINED AS ABOVE, CONSEQUENT TO THE AO DISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE FOR DEDUCTION WHILE COMPUTING TOTAL INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF BAD DEBTS WRITTEN OFF. ITA NO. 1550/BANG/2018 PAGE 2 OF 4 3. AGGRIEVED BY THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE AO, THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). 4. THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) WAS PRESENT ED IN PHYSICAL FORM BY THE ASSESSEE ON 04.05.2016. AS PER SECTION 249(1) R.W. RULE 45 OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES 1962 (RULES), THE ASSESSEE WAS OBLIGED TO FILE APPEAL IN FORM NO.35 IN ELECTRONIC FORM. THE OFFICE OF THE CIT(A) BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT APPEAL OUGHT TO HAV E BEEN FILED IN ELECTRONIC FORM AND NOT PHYSICAL FORM. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FO R HEARING ON 08.02.2018. ON THAT DATE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SA TISFY THE CIT(A) THAT AN APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AGAINST ORDER DATED 28/3/2016 U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT IN ELECTRONIC FORM. THE CIT(A), THEREFORE, DISMISSE D THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS IT WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 45 O F THE RULES I.E., NOT FILED IN ELECTRONIC FORM. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE ASSESS EE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR NO TICE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE IMP UGNED ORDER ON 08.02.2018. ON 08.02.2018 THE ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY FILED APPEAL IN AN ELECTRONIC FORM. THE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS SERVED ON T HE ASSESSEE ONLY ON 13.03.2018. THE CIT(APPEALS) HOWEVER DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON 08.02.2018 BECAUSE IT WAS NOT FILED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAW. 7. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT ON 09.02.2018 THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT TO THE NO TICE OF CIT(APPEALS) THAT AN APPEAL HAD BEEN FILED IN ELECTRONIC FORM ON 08.02.2018. ITA NO. 1550/BANG/2018 PAGE 3 OF 4 8. SINCE THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED BY THE CIT(A) DI SMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, NO ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE CIT(A) ON THE AFORESAID LETTER. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) SHOULD BE SET ASIDE A ND THE NEW APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ELECTRONIC FORM SHOULD BE TREATE D AS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS ON THE DATE ON WHICH THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN PHYSICAL FORM AND THE APPEAL FILED IN ELECTRONIC FORM SHOULD BE DECIDED ON MERITS. THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE C IT(A). 9. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IT WOULD BE JUST AND APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE ORDE R OF THE CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE CIT(A) TO TREAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ELECTRONIC FORM ON 08.02.2018 AS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AG AINST THE ORDER U/S 143(3) DATED 28/3/2016. THE CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO D ECIDE THE APPEAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFORDING THE ASSESSEE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS TR EATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 24 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018. SD/- ( A.K. GARODIA ) ( N.V. VASUDEVAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2018. / D ESAI S MURTHY / ITA NO. 1550/BANG/2018 PAGE 4 OF 4 COPY TO: 1 . THE APP ELL ANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, BANGALORE.