S.C.Javed Ahamed, Vaniyambadi V. ACIT Circle 1, Vellore

ITA 1943/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2510 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 18-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B. SAGADEVAN
• Keywords: FORM 26AS

Judgement Text

, / (SMC) , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C (SMC) BENCH: CHENNAI . , BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P.GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1943/CHNY/2018 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 SHRI S.C.JAVED AHAMED, NO.210, CHUNNAMBUKAR STREET, MUSLIMPUR, VANIYAMBADI-635 751. VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF- INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, VELLORE. [PAN: AADPA 8355 P ] ( # /APPELLANT) ( $% # /RESPONDENT) # & / APPELLANT BY : MR.R.K.V.SUNDAR, ADV. $%# & /RESPONDENT BY : MR.B.SAGADEVAN, JCIT & /DATE OF HEARING : 30.10.2018 & /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.10.2018 / O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P.GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH IS DIR ECTED AGAINST AN ORDER DATED 15.05.2018 OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X (APPEALS)-13, CHENNAI, IT HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL ON THE GROUND OF NON-APPEARANCE / ALLEGED NON-PROSECUTION OF THE APPEAL WITH ADVERSE FINDINGS ON MERITS ON THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL. 2. THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT AFFORDING THE APPELLANT A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR BEFORE HIM AND STATE HIS CASE . 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS THE APPEL LANT RAISES THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS ON MERITS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL. 4. THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING TH E ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN DISALLOWING EXPENDITURE OF RS.2,37,510/- INCURRED B Y THE APPELLANT ON ACCOUNT OF RETRENCHMENT COMPENSATION PAID TO WORKERS. ITA NO.1943/CHNY/2018 :- 2 -: 5. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THE PAYMENTS AGGREGAT ING TO RS.2,37,510/- WERE MADE DIRECTLY / INDIVIDUALLY BY CHEQUES TO EACH RETRENCH ED WORKER AND ARE DULY SUPPORTED BY SEPARATE QUIT RECEIPT UNDER THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947, MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT AND PAYMENT VOUCHER; THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE NOT RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT HAD NOT ADHERED TO THE PROVISIONS OF STATUTE WHILE MAKI NG THE PAYMENTS IN QUESTION. 6. THE APPELLANT HUMBLY SUBMITS THAT IT APPEARS FRO M THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE APPELLANTS AR HAD WITHOUT THE APPELLANTS KNOWLEDG E AND CONSENT OFFERED THE AMOUNT OF RS.2,37,510/- AS UNSUSTAINABLE EXPENDITURE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ACTED ON THE INCORRECT AND UNAUTHORIZED CONCESSION MADE BY THE A PPELLANTS AR; THE APPELLANT DISCLAIMS THE CONCESSION MADE BY HIS AR BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 7. THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ERRED IN DISMISSING TH E CLAIM MADE FOR PROPER CREDIT FOR PREPAID TAXES, DETAILS OF WHICH APPEAR IN FORM 26AS . 8. FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND RENDER JUSTICE. 2. A READING OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS SHOW THAT ASSESSE E IS MAINLY AGGRIEVED THAT AN EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT GIV EN TO IT, FOR PRESENTING ITS CASE. LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED TH AT ASSESSEE HAD A VERY GOOD CASE AND THE CLAIM OF EXPENDITURE OF RS.2,37,5 10/- BEING RETRENCHMENT COMPENSATION PAID TO WORKERS COULD BE EXPLAINED BY IT. 3. PER CONTRA, LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) H AD GIVEN NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE BUT ASSESSEE HAD NOT CARED TO ENTER APPEARANCE. AS PER THE LD.DR, LD.CIT(A) HAS DECIDED ON MERITS AFTER CONSIDERING THE GROUNDS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED T HE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW CAREFULLY. NO DOUBT, THE LD.CIT(A ) HAD GIVEN NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROSECUTE THE APPE AL BUT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT CARED TO ENTER APPEARANCE. THE LD.CIT(A) H AD CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE RETRENCHMENT COMPENSATION WITH A FINDI NG THAT ASSESSEE DID ITA NO.1943/CHNY/2018 :- 3 -: NOT ADHERE TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE WHILE M AKING PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF RETRENCHMENT COMPENSATION. NOW, LD.AR O F THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED BEFORE ME, AN UNDERTAKING THAT ASSESSEE WILL APPEAR BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), IF GIVEN ONE MORE CHANCE. CONSIDERING TH E FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, I SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND REMIT THE CASE BACK TO THE AO FOR CONSIDERATION AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSE SSEE IS TAKEN ON RECORD. LD.CIT(A) SHALL GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ENTERING APPEARANCE AND THEREAFTER DISPOSE THE APPE AL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 31 ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018, IN CHENNAI. SD/- ( . ) ( ABRAHAM P.GEORGE ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, - /DATED: OCTOBER 31, 2018. TLN & $./ 0/ /COPY TO: 1. # /APPELLANT 4. 1 /CIT 2. $%# /RESPONDENT 5. / $ /DR 3. 1 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF