Sri Subiksham Builders, Coimbatore V. ITO, Coimbatore

ITA 1726/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 57792 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 21-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: T BANUSEKAR
• Section: 143(3); 147; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1726/MDS/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) SRI SUBIKSHAM BUILDERS 16/239, T.V. SAMY ROAD [EAST] R.S. PURAM, COIMBATORE 641002 PAN : AAXFS 8830 M (APPELLANT) VS . THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER WARD II(3), COIMBATORE. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI T. BANUSEKAR, C .A RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JA COB, SR. DR. DATE OF HEARING : 11.1.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.1.2012 O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 2007-2008 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2011 OF COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - I, COIMBATORE. I.T.A. NO. 1726/MDS/2011 2 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. A.R. SHRI T. BANUSEKAR AR GUED GROUND NO. 5 OF THE APPEAL WHICH READS AS UNDER: 5 . FOR THAT, THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THA T THE APPEAL THAT WAS PENDING BEFORE THE ITAT WAS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSING THE APPEAL I N LIMINE. 3. HE SUBMITTED THAT EARLIER APPEAL FILED BY THE AS SESSEE AGAINST THE ASSESSING OFFICERS ORDER DATED 30.1.2009 PASSE D U/S 147 R.W.S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 WAS DISMISSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PAID TAX DU E ON THE INCOME ADMITTED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT AND ACCORDINGLY THE CASE WAS COVERED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 249(4)(A) OF THE ACT AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ADMISSIBLE. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL TO THE TRIBU NAL AGAINST THIS ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DATED 31.3.2010 DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED THE APPEAL VIDE I TS ORDER DATED 15.6.2011. THE LD. A.R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT WHI LE FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE I.T.A. NO. 1726/MDS/2011 3 ASSESSEE ALSO FILED FRESH APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) ALONGWITH CONDONATION PETITION SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID TH E ENTIRE TAX OF RS. 30,35,340/- PAYABLE ON THE ADMITTED INCOME IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE A CT DURING THE PERIOD 16.7.2009 TO 20.10.2010. IT WAS FURTHER SUB MITTED BY THE LD. A.R. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF TH E ASSESSEE IN LIMINE FOR THE REASON THAT THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIS EARLIER ORDER DATED 31.3.2010 WAS PENDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. H E PRAYED THAT AS THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID TAX DUE ON THE INCOME ADMI TTED IN THE RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S 148 OF T HE ACT, THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO HEAR THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS AND DECIDE THE SAME AS PER LAW. 4. THE LD. D.R. SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB DID NOT SERIOUS LY OBJECT TO THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDER ED OPINION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE AS BECAUSE I.T.A. NO. 1726/MDS/2011 4 THE APPEAL AGAINST IS ORDER DATED 31.3.2010 WAS PEN DING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ADMIT TED TAX OF RS. 30.35,340/- WAS PAID BEFORE 20.10.2010 BY THE ASSES SEE AND THE APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ON 10.2.2011 ALONGWITH CONDONATION PETITION FOR DELAY OF 531 DAYS IN FILIN G OF THE APPEAL. IN THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN O UR CONSIDERED OPINION, IT WILL BE JUST AND FAIR TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF TH E LD. CIT(A) TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THUS THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE IS ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED AS ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 11 TH JANUARY, 2012. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) (N.S. SAI NI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 11 TH JANUARY, 2012. VL I.T.A. NO. 1726/MDS/2011 5 COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A), CHENNAI (4) CIT, CHENNAI (5) D.R. (6) GUARD FILE