M/s. Switzer Instrument and Controls Ltd., CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1891/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 57951 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 23-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OMKARESJHWAR CHIDRA
• Assessee Lawyers: R VIJAYARAGHAVAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH C CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI N. S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER .. I.T.A. NO. 1891/MDS/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 M/S. SWITZER INSTRUMENT AND CONTROLS LTD., NEW NO. 29 (OLD NO.14), THANIKACHALAM ROAD, T. NAGAR, CHENNAI-600 017. V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COMPANYCIRCLE-VI(4), CHENNAI. (PAN: AAACS6322G) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI R. VIJAYARAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI OMKARESJHWAR CHIDRA, CIT-DR DATE OF HEARING : 16-02-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 6-02-2012 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS)-V, CHENNAI IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A)-V/ITA NO. 372/2010-11 DATED 31- I.T.A. NO. 1891/MDS/2011 2 10-2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. SHRI R. VIJAYARAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDRA, LEARNED CIT-DR REPRESE NTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRE SENTATIVE THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN LIMINE . IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MOVED AN ADJOURNME NT LETTER ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD NOT CONSIDERE D THE SAID LETTER AND HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ISSUES IN THE APPEAL MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR RE- ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 4. IN REPLY, THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAD BEEN GRANTED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WHICH HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN PARA 4 OF HIS ORDER. IT WAS THE SUBMISSI ON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN CALLOUS AND INDIFFERENT ATTITUDE AND THE ASSE SSEE SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. A PER USAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GRANTED 5 OPPORTUNITIES. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CONTI NUOUSLY ASKING FOR ADJOURNMENT AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN THE ORDER OF T HE LEARNED CIT(A). I.T.A. NO. 1891/MDS/2011 3 HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AND THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED AN ADJOURNMENT LETTER BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A), WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE TECHNICALITI ES SHOULD STAND DOWN AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. THIS HAS NOT BEEN DONE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE A RE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL MUST BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR RE- ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE O PPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT ITS CASE AND WE DO SO. THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE R ESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) ONLY BECAUSE THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT ADJUDICATED THE ISSUES ON MERITS. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD GRANTED NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES AND THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN M OVING ADJOURNMENT APPLICATIONS, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT A COST IS LIABLE TO BE LEVIED IN THIS CASE, WHICH HAS BEEN AGREED UPON BY BOTH THE SIDES AT ` 5,000/-. THE AMOUNT SHALL BE DEPOSITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF MADRAS SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN, NEW NO. 891, OLD NO. 28, THIRUVOTTIYUR HIGH ROAD, O LD WASHERMANPET, CHENNAI- 600 021. THE ASSESSEE SHALL PRODUCE THE RECEIPT O F HAVING PAID THE COST TO THE SAID ACCOUNT BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO SHALL TH EN PROCEED TO HEAR THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. IF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT MAKE THE PAYMENT BEFORE THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A), THIS ORDER SHALL STAND VACATED AND THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) SHALL S TAND CONFIRMED. IN THE I.T.A. NO. 1891/MDS/2011 4 CIRCUMSTANCES, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 16/02/2 012. SD/- SD/- (N. S. SAINI) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 16 TH FEBRUARY, 2012. H. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE