M/S. HELIOS SOLUTIONS LTD., CHENNAI V. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 2 (3), CHENNAI

ITA 180/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3078 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 24-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S R ANITA
• Assessee Lawyers: N ARJUN RAJ
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence; Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I .T.A. NO S . 180 & 181 /CHNY/20 20 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 3 - 20 1 4 M/S. HELIOS SOLUTIONS LIMITED, NO.1, RAGHAVAN COLONY, FIRST LINK STREET, JHAFFERKHANPET, CHENNAI 600 083. [PAN: AAACH 9671H ] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 2 (3), INCO ME TAX DEPARTMENT, 121, NUNGAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI 600 034. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. N. ARJUN R AJ , C.A /RESPONDENT BY : M R S . R. ANITA, J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 02 . 1 1 .2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02. 1 1 .2020 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE TWO APPEAL S, I .T.A. NOS.180 & 181/CHNY/2020 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 6 , CHENNAI I N I.T.A. NO.7/CIT(A) - 6/2017 - 18, DATED 28.11.2019 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 3 - 20 1 4 . I . T . A NO S . 180 & 181 /CHNY/20 20 : - 2 - : THERE IS A DELAY OF NINE DAYS IN FILING OF THESE APPEALS BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS) SIMPLY DISMISSED THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND OF DELAY WITHOUT ADJUDICATING THE APPEAL ON MERITS. WE FIND THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS NO POWER TO DISMISS SIMPLY ON THE DELAY WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF T HE CASE. IN FACT, IN THIS CASE, THE DELAY IS ONLY NINE DAYS AND THEREFORE WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE CONDONED THE DELAY. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE DELAY IS BECAUSE THAT ALL THE DIRE CTORS WERE OUT OF STATION AND HENCE COULD NOT FILE THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN TIME. WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN AFFIDAVIT, HE HAS STATED THAT HE COULD NOT FILE THE APPEAL DUE TO THE REASON THAT ALL THE DIRECTO RS WERE OUT OF STATION. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT NOT TO HAVE REJECTED THE CONTENT OF THE AFFIDAVIT WITHOUT PROPER VERIFICATION. I . T . A NO S . 180 & 181 /CHNY/20 20 : - 3 - : WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IT IS A FIT CASE TO CONDONE THE DELAY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DELAY IS COND ONED. I .T.A. NO.181/CHNY/2020 : WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HA S PASSED AN EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE . HE ALSO FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY HAS SIGNED DIGITALLY AND THE FINDING OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS NOT CORRECT. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEARED BEFORE THE LEARNED ASS ESSING OFFICER DUE TO HEAVY FLOODS PREVAILING AT THE TIME AT CHENNAI AND HENCE HE COULD NOT FILE RELEVANT DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HE HAS FILED A PETITION UNDER RULE 29 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963 FOR ADMI SSION OF ADDIT IONAL EVIDENCES AND SUBMITTED THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES MAY BE ADMITTED AND THE ISSUE REMITTED BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. I . T . A NO S . 180 & 181 /CHNY/20 20 : - 4 - : 2. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS GIVEN SUFFICIE NT OPPORTUNITY BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEARED EVEN BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). HE HAS SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 3 . WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES THROUGH VIDEO - CONFERENCING, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABL E ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S.144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON 28 TH MARCH, 2016. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE CO MPANY HAS FILED ITS ORIGINAL RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 2014 BELATEDLY ON 13.01.2014 ADMITTING A TAXABLE INCOME OF RS.32,35,690/ - AND ARRIVING AT A TAX PAYABLE OF RS.11,80,869/ - . THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME WITHOUT PAYING THE RESULTANT TAX. THE FORM 3CA RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 2014 WAS ALSO BELATEDLY UPLOADED ON 13.01.2014. SUBSEQUENTLY, ON 06.09.2014 , THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED A REVIED RETURN CONVERTING THE INCOME ORIGINALLY ADMITTED TO A RETURNED LOSS OF I . T . A NO S . 180 & 181 /CHNY/20 20 : - 5 - : RS.1, 43,220/ - . THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS REMAINED UNMOVED WITH STOIC SILENCE FOR ALL THE NOTICES / COMMUNICATIONS ISSUED ALL ALONG. THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S.271(1)(B) ALSO DID NOT ELICIT ANY COMPLIANCE FROM IT. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY DETAILS NOR DOCUMENT EVIDENCES. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CO - OPERATED TO FINALIZE THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. ACCORDINGLY, THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED THE VARIOUS EXPENDITURES THAT WERE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED. 5. BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO THE HEAVY FLOODS AT CHENNAI DURING DECEMBER 2015 , THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE WAS AFFECTED WHOLLY WHICH LEAD TO THE PASSING OF THE EX - PARTE BEST JUDG EMENT ASSESSMENT U/S.144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO THE UNEXPECTED HAPPENING IN THE CITY OF CHENNAI, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE RELEVANT DETAILS BEFORE THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER. AS THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO COLLECT ALL THE RELEVANT DETAILS NOW, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE BEFORE THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER. I . T . A NO S . 180 & 181 /CHNY/20 20 : - 6 - : 6. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 7. WE HAVE HEARD B OTH THE SIDES THROUGH VIDEO - CONFERENCING, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 8. WE FIND THAT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED THE BEST JUDGEMENT ORDER U/S.144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY RELEVANT BILLS AND VOUCHERS NOR OTHER DOCUMENTS IN RESPECT OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE AND WE ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CO - OPERATED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT. THE CASE OF TH E ASSESSEE IS THAT, AT THE RELEVANT POINT OF TIME DUE TO THE HEAVY FLOODS, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE ANY RELEVANT MATERIAL BEFORE THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO FILE ALL THE RELEVANT MAT ERIALS BEFORE THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE. TO SUPPORT HIS CASE, THE A SSESSEE HAS FILED A PAPER - BOOK, WHEREIN IN PAGE - 636, A TAHSILDAR, MAMBALAM TALUK, CHENNAI HAS ISSUED A CERTIFICATE BY STATING THAT THE OFFICE PREMISES (HELIOS I . T . A NO S . 180 & 181 /CHNY/20 20 : - 7 - : SOLUTIONS LIMITED COMPANY) OF THIRU SWAMYNATHAN S/O (LATE) GOVINDARAJAN SITUATED AT NO.1, 1 ST LINK STREET, RAGHAVAN COLONY, JAFFERKHANPET, CHENNAI 600 083 HAS BEEN AFFECTED BY THE RECENT FLOODS DUE TO TORRENTIAL NORTH - EAST MONSOON RAIN IN DECEMBER 2015. 9. WE THEREFORE BY TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION ALL THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, MAMBALAM TALUK, WE FIND THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE BEFORE THE LEARNED ASS ESSING OFFICER. SO FAR AS THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THAT THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY HAS TO SIGN, WE DIRECT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES. SO FAR A S THE ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES IS CONCERNED, WE REMIT THE ENTIRE PAPER - BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CONSISTING OF 636 PAGES, WE DIRECT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER TO PERUSE THE RELEVANT AND NECESSARY BILLS AND VOUCHERS AND DOCUMENTS AND BY CONSIDE RING THE SAME, IT IS OPEN TO THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER TO PASS AN ASSESSMENT ORDER DE NOV O IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. WE ALSO DIRECT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO APPEAR AND FILE ALL THE RELEVANT DETAILS AS AND WHEN DIRECTED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING I . T . A NO S . 180 & 181 /CHNY/20 20 : - 8 - : OFFICER. WE FURTHER DIRECT THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD FULLY CO - OPERATE WITH THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT. WITH THE ABOVE DIRECTIONS, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I .T.A. NO.181/CHNY/2020 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. I .T.A. NO.18 0 /CHNY/2020 : 10. IN THIS APPEAL, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS PASSED AN EX - PARTE ORDER. WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS TO BE SET ASIDE ON THE GROUND OF NATURAL JUSTICE AS WELL AS FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. 11. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND REMIT BACK THE FILE TO THE A SSESSING OFFICER TO PASS AN ORDER AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I .T.A. NO.18 0 /CHNY/2020 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. I . T . A NO S . 180 & 181 /CHNY/20 20 : - 9 - : 12 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN I .T.A. NO.18 0 & 181 /CHNY/2020 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. O RDER PRONOUNCED ON 2 ND NOVEMBER , 2020 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - ( . ) ( S. JAYARAMAN ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - ( ) ( V. DURGA RAO ) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI, / DATED: 2 ND NOVEMBER , 2020 IA , SR. P.S /COPY TO: 1. /APPEL LANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. () /CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. /DR 6. /GF