Mayur Dyechem Intermediates Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-4(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 1852/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 85687 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 12-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 22-07-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MK SINGH
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 43B; 143(3)

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD 00 , ! ' #$, % & BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER !./ ITA NO. 1852/AHD/2011 % ) *)/ ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1996-97 MAYUR DYE CHEM INTERMEDIATES LTD. A/108,GIDC ESTATE, PHASE-II VATVA, AHMEDABAD. PAN : AABCM 9608 M VS ITO, WARD - 4(4) AHMEDABAD. +, / (APPELLANT) -. +, / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE(S) BY : SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI REVENUE BY : SHRI M.K. SINGH, SR. DR. / DATE OF HEARING : 12/02/2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 13/02/2015 // O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-VIII, AHMEDABAD DATED 8.6.2011. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACT S OF THE CASE IN HOLDING THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BEFORE HIM IS INFRUCTUOUS ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S 254 IN PURSUANT TO DIRECTION OF THE HONBLE I TAT WHICH HAS BEEN RECTIFIED SUBSEQUENTLY BY THE HONBLE ITAT ON BEING MA FILED AGAINST THE SAID ITAT ORDER AND ACCORDINGLY THE ID. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN NOT ADJUDICATING GROUND RAISED BY T HE APPELLANT ITA NO.1852/AHD/2011 2 AGAINST THE ACTION OF ID. AO IN NOT ALLOWING EXCISE DUTY OF RS.64,00,248/- U/S 43B OF THE ACT. 2 THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT IN T HE FIRST ROUND OF APPEAL, THE HONBLE ITAT DUE TO INADVERTENT MISTAKE GAVE DIRECTION TO ALLOW EXCISE DUTY EXPENDITURE OF RS.64 ,00,248/-IN THE ACCOUNTING YEARS 1992-93 TO 1994-95 INSTEAD OF THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND ON BEING MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIO N FILED BY THE APPELLANT, THE SAME APPARENT MISTAKE WAS RECTIFIED AND ACCORDINGLY THE HONBLE ITAT GAVE THE DIRECTION TO ALLOW THE EXCISE DUTY EXPENDITURE OF RS.64,00,248/- U/S 43B O F THE ACT IN THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL. 3. BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN PASSING THE ORDERS WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING TH E FACT AND THAT HE FURTHER ERRED IN GROSSLY IGNORING VARIOUS SUBMIS SIONS, EXPLANATIONS AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY THE APPEL LANT FROM TIME TO TIME WHICH OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BEFORE PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THIS ACTION OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES IS IN CLEAR BREACH OF LAW AND PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND THEREFORE DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN NOT ADJUDICATING THE GROUND RAISED IN APPEAL AGA INST THE ACTION OF THE ID. AO IN LEVYING INTEREST U/S 234B/C OF THE ACT. 5. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN NOT ADJUDICATING THE GROUND RAISED IN APPEAL AGA INST THE ACTION OF THE ID. AO IN INITIATING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(L)(C) OF THE ACT. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE S UBMITTED THAT HE WANTS TO WITHDRAW THIS APPEAL AND ALSO MADE AN ENDO RSEMENT TO THIS EFFECT IN THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN FORM NO.36. 4. DR HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE SAME. ITA NO.1852/AHD/2011 3 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE AS SESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED AS WITHDRAWN ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON FRIDAY THE 13 TH FEBRUARY, 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 13/02/2015