The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad V. M/s.Adani Agri Fresh Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 2106/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8246 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH BEFORE: SHR I MAHAVIR PRASAD , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/S ASIAN AGENCY FF - 29, KRISHNA GOPAL ESTATE, OPP. STATE BANK OF INDIA, NR. FRUIT MARKET, NARODA ROAD, AHMEDABAD - 380025 PAN: AAIFA5304K (APPELLANT) VS THE ITO, WARD - 12(2), AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI MUDIT N AGPAL , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: S H RI PARIN SHAH , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 07 - 11 - 2 017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16 - 11 - 2 017 / ORDER P ER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER : - THIS ASSESSEE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2008 - 09 , AR IS ES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 7, AHMEDABAD DATED 01 - 05 - 2015 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF A PPEAL: - I T A NO . 2016 / A HD/20 15 A SSESSME NT YEAR 200 8 - 09 I.T.A NO. 2016 /AHD/20 15 A.Y. 2008 - 09 PAGE NO M/S. ASIAN AGENCY VS. ITO 2 1. LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL ON THE GROUND OF LATE FILING OF THE APPEAL WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT DUE TO HEALTH REASONS THERE WAS DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL ON TIME DESPITE PAYING APPEAL FEES WELL IN A DVANCE. THE ORDER OF ID. CIT (A) DISMISSING THE APPEAL IN ABSENCE OF DELAY CONDONATION PETITION IS HARSH & UNCALLED FOR. 2. IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED TO THE HON'BLE BENCH TO SET ASIDE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF ID. CIT (A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUES ON MERITS GRANTING OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TO SUBMIT EVIDENCES CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL CONSIDERING THE CIRCUMSTANCES NARRATED ABOVE. IT BE SO HELD NOW. 3. LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT ADJUDICATING GROU NDS CHALLENGING ADDITION OF RS. 3, 85, 78, 246/ - MADE BY AO BEING DIFFERENCE OF CREDIT BALANCE AS PER THE BOOKS OF KIRLOSKAR FERROUS INDUSTRIES LIMITED ON MERITS. 4. LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234A/B/C OF THE ACT IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 5. INITIATION OF PE NALTY U/S 271(1 )(C) OF THE ACT IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 3. IN THIS CASE, RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 9 , 60 , 560/ - WAS FILED ON 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2008. THEREAFTER, ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) WAS MADE ON 23 RD DECEMBER , 2010 BY DETERMIN ING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 10 , 64 , 730/ - . DURING THE COURSE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOTICED WHILE EXAMINATION OF DETAIL RECEIVED FROM ONE OF THE CREDITOR NAMED KIRLOSKAR FERROUS INDIA LTD. THAT IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS DEBIT BALANCE OF RS.29,87,770/ - WAS STANDING AGAINST THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE WHEREAS THE ASESSEE HAS SHOWN CREDIT BALANCE OF RS.41566106/ - AGAINST THE NAME OF ABOVE NAMED CREDITOR. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN CREDITORS OF RS. 38578296/ - IN EXCESS IN THE CASE OF KIRLOSKAR I.T.A NO. 2016 /AHD/20 15 A.Y. 2008 - 09 PAGE NO M/S. ASIAN AGENCY VS. ITO 3 FERROUS INDIA LTD. IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS REOPENED BY ISSUING OF NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT. DURING THE COURSE OF RE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS STATE D THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECONCILED THE DISCREPANCY REFLECTED IN THE SUNDRY CREDITOR, THE REFORE, THE DIFFERENCE OF RS. 38 578246/ - WAS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOM E OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNACCOUNTED IN COME. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). NOBODY HAS ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). CONSEQUENTLY , THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. DURING T HE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US, THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FIL ED AN AFFIDAVIT STATING THAT SHRI CHANDRAKANT B LAKHISARANI , THE PARTNER WHO WAS MANAGING THE TAX RELATED AFFAIRS OF THE ASSESSEE - FIRM HAS NOT ATTENDED THE OFFICE DUE TO ILL HEALTH. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT RELEVANT PAPER SENT BY SHRI CHANDRAKANT B LAKH ISARANI WAS NOT DELIVERED TO HIM AS HIS ACCOUNTANT HAD LEF T THE JOB. HE STATED THAT UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THERE WAS DELAY IN FILING T HE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT ATTENDED AS THERE WAS NO PERSONA L HEARING TAKEN PLACE. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE CONSIDERED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED AS THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILED ANY PETITION FOR CONDO NATION OF DELAY BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). WE OBSERVED THAT THE AFFIDAVIT, APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION ALONG MEDICAL CERTIFICATE FILED BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE WAS THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT FILING I.T.A NO. 2016 /AHD/20 15 A.Y. 2008 - 09 PAGE NO M/S. ASIAN AGENCY VS. ITO 4 THE AFORESAID INFORMATION BEFORE THE CIT(A). THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST O F JUSTICE WE RESTORE THIS CASE TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) ALONG WITH AFORESAID INFORMATION FOR ADJUDICATING THIS CASE ON MERIT AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE . 4. IN THE RESULT , THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 16 - 11 - 201 7 SD/ - SD/ - ( MAHAVIR PRASAD ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATE D 16 /11 /2017 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,