DCIT, CHENNAI V. Max Lab Cinemas & Entertainment Pvt Ltd., Ernakulam

ITA 2184/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4151 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 20-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R JEYAKUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: IYPE MATHEW
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI , ! , ! & BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NOS.2183 TO 2186/MDS/2015 /ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2009-10 TO 2012-13 THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI. VS. M/S.MAX LAB CINEMAS & ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD., VALAKUZHI KEJRI-3, KRISHNASWAMY ROAD, NEW PULLAPADI JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM 682 035. [PAN: AAFCM 7921 G] ( ( /APPELLANT) ( )*( /RESPONDENT) CROSS OBJECTION NO S . 16 TO 19 /MDS /20 16 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2009-10 TO 2012-13 M/S.MAX LAB CINEMAS & ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD., VALAKUZHI KEJRI-3, KRISHNASWAMY ROAD, NEW PULLAPADI JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM 682 035. [PAN: AAFCM 7921 G] VS. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(1), CHENNAI. ( ( /APPELLANT) ( )*( /RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : MR.R.JEYAKUMAR, CIT ASSESSEE BY : MR.IYPE MATHEW, CA , /DATE OF HEARING : 13.06.2017 , /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.06.2017 ITA NOS.2183 TO 2186/MDS/2015 & CO NOS.16-19/MDS/2016 :- 2 -: / O R D E R PER BENCH : ITA NOS.2183 TO 2186/MDS/2015 ARE THE APPEALS FILE D BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-18, CHENNAI, IN ITA NOS.44 TO 47/14-15 DATED 10.08.2015 FOR THE AYS 2009- 10 TO 2012-13 AND CROSS OBJECTION NOS.16 TO 19/MDS/ 2016 FOR THE AYS 2009-10 TO 2012-13 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE REV ENUES APPEAL NOS.2183 TO 2186/MDS/2015. 2. MR.IYPE MATHEW, CA, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI MR.R.JEYAKUMAR, CIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE D EPARTMENT. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT IN THE CROSS- OBJECTIONS THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED LEGAL ISSUES IN RESPECT OF THE NON-ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U/S.143(2) AND ON MERITS, THE ISSUES IN THE REVENUE S APPEAL AND THE CROSS-OBJECTIONS WERE AGAINST THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT O F NON-DEDUCTION OF TDS IN RESPECT OF VARIOUS EXPENSES DEBITED TO THE INCOM E EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE ITS ELF WHEN FILING ITS RETURN DISALLOWED THE EXPENSES ON WHICH TDS HAS NOT BEEN DEDUCTED BY APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.40(A)(IA). IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE AO WITHOUT EXAMINING ANY OF THE ISSUES HAS MADE A BLAN KET DISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF VARIOUS EXPENSES ALLEGING NON-DEDUCTION OF TDS. ON A SPECIFIC ITA NOS.2183 TO 2186/MDS/2015 & CO NOS.16-19/MDS/2016 :- 3 -: QUERY TO THE LD.DR, AS TO WHETHER THE AO HAS EXAMIN ED THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE TO VERIFY WHETHER TDS HAS BEEN DEDUCTE D OR NOT? IT WAS FAIRLY AGREED BY THE LD.DR THAT THE ISSUES IN THE R EVENUE APPEAL AND IN THE CROSS-OBJECTIONS COULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE- ADJUDICATION. THE LD.AR DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTIONS. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ORDER OF THE AO IS NOT A SPEAKING ORDER AND ALL THE FACTS ARE NOT ASCERTAINABLE FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IN SO FAR AS IT IS MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS A SEARCH INITIATED U/S.132 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BY EXECUTING A WARRANT OF AUTHORIZATION ON 22.07.2011. BUT IMMEDIATELY IN THE NEXT LINE, IT IS MENTIONED THAT SEIZED MATERIAL RELATING TO THE ASSESSEE WAS FOUND FROM THE PREMISES SEARCHED IN THE MOHANLA L GROUP AND SATISFACTION NOTE HAS BEEN RECORDED IN THE ASSESSEE S FILE WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THERE IS NO CLARITY IN RESPECT OF THE FA CTS. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ISSUES IN THESE APPEALS ARE REST ORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. ALL ISSUES INCLUDING LEGAL ISSUES ARE LEFT OPEN. ITA NOS.2183 TO 2186/MDS/2015 & CO NOS.16-19/MDS/2016 :- 4 -: 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS- OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JUNE 13, 201 7, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( S. JAYARAMAN ) ! /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ! /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 1 /DATED: JUNE 13, 2017. TLN , )23 43 /COPY TO: 1. ( /APPELLANT 4. 5 /CIT 2. )*( /RESPONDENT 5. 3 ) /DR 3. 5 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF