Soundararaja Mill Ltd., CHENNAI V. JCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 2181/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8225 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 25-08-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR MILIND BHUSARICIT
• Assessee Lawyers: R KUMAR
• Keywords: Depreciation; Opportunity of being heard; Unabsorbed depreciation
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI ... , . , , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.2181 /MDS./2014 ( ! '! / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010-11) M/S.SOUNDARARAJA MILLS LTD., SOUNDARARAJA BUILDINGS, GTN SALAI,BALAKRISHNAPURAM, DINDIGUL 624 005. VS. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY RANGE VI, CHENNAI -34. PAN AAACS 8799 R ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) #$ % & / APPELLANT BY : MR.R.KUMAR, ADVOCATE '(#$ % & / RESPONDENT BY : DR.MILIND BHUSARI,CIT, D.R ) * % +, / DATE OF HEARING : 31.12.2015 -' % +, /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.01.2016 / O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, AGGRIEVED B Y THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-VI, CHENN AI DATED ITA NO. 2181/MDS/2014 2 17.06.2014 IN ITA NO.1423/13-14/A-IV PASSED UNDER S EC.143(3) READ WITH SEC. 250 OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVEN ELABORATE GROUNDS IN HIS APPEAL AS FOLLOWS:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) IS CONTRARY TO THE RECORDS OF THE CASE AND IS INCORRECT AND INCOMPLETE . 2. THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATING AND ADJUDICATING THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE APPEAL AND DI SMISSING THE APPEAL WITH CURSORY REMARKS. 3. THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT SEEING T HAT SUBSEQUENT TO THE ASSESSMENT MADE FOR THE INSTANT YEAR ON 21.03.2013, THE UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION ALLOWANCE OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09 HAD UNDERGONE A CHANGE AND INCREASED BY A SUM OF RS.2,89,44,075/-- -VIDE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.01 .2014AND THE APPELLANT COMPANY IS ELIG IBLE FOR DEDUCTION OF SUCH INCREASED UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION ALLOWANCE. 4. THE COMMISSIONER APPEALS FAILED TO SEE THAT AS: PER THE WORKING OF UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION ALLOWANCE TABULATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HIMSELF BY ITA NO. 2181/MDS/2014 3 WAY OF AN ANNEXURE TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER (DATED 2 1.03.2013) THERE IS A DIFFERENCE OF AS MUCH AS RS. 17,61,91,168/- (RS. 11 3,53,16,923 RS.95,91 ,25,755) BETWEEN THE APPELLANTS CLAIM AND THE ASSE SSING OFFICERS WORKING; HOWEVER, THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) HAS NOT DEALT W ITH AND GIVEN NECESSARY DIRECTION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY HIS WO RKING AND ADOPT THE CORRECT AMOUNT IN DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THIS YEAR . 5. THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT TAKING N OTE OF THE SUBMISSION (REPRODUCED IN PAGE 3 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER) THAT ON ACCOUNT OF A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR THE INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAINS WAS OVERSTATED AS RS.116,91,77,475 INSTEAD OF RS.108,50,49,275 AND THE MISTAKE WAS BROUGHT OUT IN A REVISED STATEMENT OF INCOME WHICH WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER. 6. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT: ON A REMAND BY THIS HONBLE TRIBUNAL THE ASSESSMENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 WAS RESTORE D TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION AND ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.SEC.254 OF THE ACT DATED 31.01.2014 WAS PASSED BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER, AGAINST WHICH AN APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONE R (APPEALS) ON 14.03.2014 AND IS PENDING; THE APPEAL INVOLVES ADDITION OF RS. 17.86 CRORES AS CARBON CREDIT INCOME BROUGHT TO TAX BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER AND IS CONTESTED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) BASED ON THE FACTS OF THE CA SE AND JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON THE SUBJECT; A FAVORABLE DECISION IN THE SAID APPEA L WILL RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL ITA NO. 2181/MDS/2014 4 INCREASE IN THE UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION ALLOWANCE A VAILABLE FOR SET OFF IN THE PRESENT YEAR. 7. FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAYBE ADDUCED A T THE TIME OF HEARING THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL BE PLEASE D TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AND RESTORE THE CASE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND/OR PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER AS THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL THINKS FIT, ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND RENDER JUSTICE. 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT IDENTIC AL ISSUES PERTAINING TO EARLIER YEARS ARE PENDING BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHICH WOULD BE RELEVANT WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL. HENCE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A). THE LD. D.R ALSO AGREED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. A.R. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE ARE OF THE CON SIDERED VIEW THAT THE EARLIER APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE PENDING BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) AND THIS APPEAL HAS TO BE HEARD TOGETHER TO ARRIVE AT PROPER DECISION. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE HEREBY REM IT BACK THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT (A) WITH DIRECTIONS TO CLUB THE RELEVANT APPEALS ITA NO. 2181/MDS/2014 5 TOGETHER FOR FRESH HEARING AND AFTER AFFORDING SUFF ICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER AS PER MERITS A ND LAW. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 06 TH JANAUARY,2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( N.R.S.GANESAN ) ( . '#$ %' ) (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED 06 TH JANAUARY,2016. K S SUNDARAM. % '+./ 0 /'+ /COPY TO: 1. #$ /APPELLANT 2. '(#$ /RESPONDENT 3. ) 1+ () /CIT(A) 4. ) 1+ /CIT 5. /4 '+5 /DR 6. 6! 7* /GF