ACIT, Madurai V. Laxmi Selvaraaj Tex Private Ltd., Madurai

ITA 2271/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4412 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 14-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. : 2271/MDS/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010-11 THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE I, MADURAI. V. M/S. LAXMI SELVARAAJ TEX PRIVATE LTD., NO.9/7B, DINDIGUL ROAD, VILANGUDI, MADURAI 625 018. PAN: AABCL5470H ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) /APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.V. SREEKANTH, JCIT /RESPONDENT BY : NONE /DATE OF HEARING : 02.05.2017 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.05.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, MADURAI DATED 18.09.2015 AND PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 -11. 2. SHRI A.V. SREEKANTH, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRE SENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERAT ION IS CARRY 2 I.T.A. NO. 2271/MDS/2015 FORWARD OF BUSINESS LOSS, WHEN THE RETURN WAS NOT F ILED U/S. 139(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONB LE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN PENTAMEDIA GRAPHICS LTD. VS. ITO, 236 CTR 204 ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDING TO THE LD. DR , THE REVENUE HAS FILED SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (SLP) BEFORE THE A PEX COURT AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN TH E CASE OF PENTAMEDIA GRAPHICS LTD SUPRA. THEREFORE THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT OUGHT NOT HAVE BEEN FOLLOWED BY T HE LD.CIT(APPEALS). ACCORDING TO THE LD. DR, THE DUE DATE FOR FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME WAS 30.09.2010. IN FACT THE RETUR N WAS FILED ON 17.05.2011. SINCE THE RETURN WAS NOT FILED WITHIN THE DUE DATE, ACCORDING TO THE LD.DR THE CIT(APPEALS) IS NOT JUST IFIED IN ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF SERV ICE OF NOTICE THROUGH DEPARTMENT. THE LD. DR HAS PLACED T HE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AS A PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE. I NSPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE, NO ONE APPEARED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL WHE N THE APPEAL IS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING. THEREFORE AFTER HEARING THE LD.DR, THIS APPEAL IS BEING DISPOSED OFF ON MERITS. 3 I.T.A. NO. 2271/MDS/2015 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD.DR, THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) AFTER REPRODUCING THE OBSERVATION M ADE BY THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN PENTAMEDIA GRAPHICS LT D SUPRA ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THIS TRIBUNAL I S OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COU RT BEING THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, IT IS BINDING ON ALL AUT HORITIES. THE MERE PENDENCY OF SLP BEFORE THE APEX COURT CANNOT BE A R EASON TO IGNORE THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COUR T. SINCE THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) HAS FOLLOWED THE JUDGMENT OF THE HO NBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT, THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY. ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 31 ST MAY, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, /DATED, THE 31 ST MAY, 2017. JR. /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( )/CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. !' /DR 6. #$ /GF