ITO Corporate Ward 5(4), CHENNAI V. Raj Kishor Engineering, CHENNAI

ITA 1669/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5720 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R ANITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Set aside
• Section: 40(a)(ia)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! ' # , % #& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1669/CHNY/2018 ) *) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 5(4), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. M/S RAJ KISHOR ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., 486, 17 TH STREET, 4 TH SECTOR, K.K. NAGAR, CHENNAI - 600 078. PAN : AAECR 9284 L (,-/ APPELLANT) (./,-/ RESPONDENT) ,- 0 1 / APPELLANT BY : MS. R. ANITHA, JCIT ./,- 0 1 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE 2 0 3% / DATE OF HEARING : 03.09.2019 45* 0 3% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.10.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -3, CHENNA I, DATED 27.02.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. MS. R. ANITHA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE, SUBMITTED THAT THE FIRST ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERA TION IS DISALLOWANCE OF 6,23,16,348/- UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME -TAX ACT, 2 I.T.A. NO.1669/CHNY/18 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). ACCORDING TO THE LD. D. R., IN THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDING, THE CIT(APPEALS) ADMITTED ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT GIVING ANY O PPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN VIOLATION OF RULE 46A OF THE I NCOME-TAX RULES, 1962. THEREFORE, THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE M ATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. WE HEARD SHRI G. BASKAR, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO. THE LD.COUNSEL VERY FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT TH E ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS FILED BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS), THEREFO RE, THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING O FFICER FOR RECONSIDERATION. 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD. D.R. AND THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINIO N THAT SINCE THE ADDITIONAL MATERIAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE CIT(APPEAL S) AND THE SAME WAS ADMITTED WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN VIOLATION OF RULE 46A, THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE RE -EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTI ON 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER IN TH E LIGHT OF THE 3 I.T.A. NO.1669/CHNY/18 MATERIAL THAT WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAF TER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE NEXT ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DISAL LOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VA) OF THE ACT. 6. WE HEARD THE LD. D.R. AND THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE VERY FAIRLY SUBMITT ED THAT THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION IS NOT AVAILA BLE ON RECORD, THEREFORE, THIS ISSUE ALSO NEEDS TO BE RE-EXAMINED. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW. THE EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PROVIDENT FUND AND ESI W AS DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, THE DATE OF ACT UAL PAYMENT WAS NOT BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. TH EREFORE, AS RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE RE-EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE DISA LLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VA) OF TH E ACT IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASS ESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER AND BRING ON RECORD THE ACTUAL DATE OF 4 I.T.A. NO.1669/CHNY/18 PAYMENT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO THE PROVIDENT FUND AND ESI AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANC E WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1 ST OCTOBER, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' # ) ( . . . ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (N.R.S. GANESAN) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 7 /DATED, THE 1 ST OCTOBER, 2019. KRI. 0 .389 :9*3 /COPY TO: 1. ,- /APPELLANT 2. ./,- /RESPONDENT 3. 2 ;3 () /CIT(A)-3, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT- 5, CHENNAI 5. 9< .3 /DR 6. ) = /GF.