Bengal Tiger Line (India) Pvt. Ltd., Chennai V. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation., Margao

ITA 231/PAN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 93628 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 30-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 07-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S NATARAJ LD
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 231 & 232/PNJ/2014 : (A.YS 2004 - 05 & 2008 - 09) BENGAL TIGER LINE (INDIA) PVT. LTD., (R/A BENGAL TIGER LINE LIMITED, CYPRUS), M.A. CHIDAMBARAM BUILDING, III FLOOR, NO. 6 ESPLANADE, CHENNAI 600 108 (APPELLANT) PAN : AAACB1369A VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, MARGAO, GOA. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : S. NATARAJ, LD. DR DATE OF HEARING : 30/07/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30/07/2015 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN : 1. ITA NO. 231/PNJ/2014 AND ITA NO. 232/PNJ/2014 ARE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) - IV, BANGALORE IN APPEAL NO. 03/R - 19/BANGALORE/CIT(A) - IV/2011 - 12, 04/R - 19/BANGALORE/CIT(A) - IV/2011 - 12 DT. 25.4.2014 FOR A.Y S 2004 - 05 & 2008 - 09. NONE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SHRI S. NATARAJ, LD. DR REPRESENTE D ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN ADJOURNMENT LETTER STATING THAT THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TRAVELLING DURING THE LAST WEEK OF JULY, 2015. 2 ITA NOS. 231 & 232/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2004 - 05 & 2008 - 09) THE SAID REASON GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SUBSTANTIATED. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS REJECTED. 3. A PERUSAL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, MORE SPECIFICALLY PARA 2.1 OF THE GROUNDS, SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ACT ION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN PASSING THE ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WHEN THIS WAS PUT TO THE LD. DR, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. DR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISPOSED OFF ON THE BASIS OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) SHOWS THAT THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND HAS REQUESTED FOR DI SPOSAL OF THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO TAKEN A REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO. HOWEVER, WHAT WAS MENTIONED IN THE REMAND REPORT IS NOT COMING OUT FROM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). WHETHER THE REMAND REPORT WAS PU T TO THE ASSESSEE FOR HIS OBJECTIONS IS NOT COMING OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), NOR ARE THE FACTS IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE COMING OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). FURTHER, A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) SHOWS THA T HE HAS REFERRED TO A DECISION OF THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. MARINE LINKS SHIPPING IN ITA NO. 184/BANG/2011. THE ASSESSEE, IT IS NOTICED, HAS FILED A DECISION OF THE CHENNAI BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CAS E. THERE IS NO DISCUSSION IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AS TO HOW THE DECISION OF THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE BY THE ITAT, CHENNAI BENCHES WAS NOT APPLICABLE AND THE DECISION OF THE BANGALORE BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. MARINE LINKS SHIPPING WAS APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEES CASE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, CLEARLY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) HAS BEEN PASSED 3 ITA NOS. 231 & 232/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2004 - 05 & 2008 - 09) WITHOUT GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO REBUT THE VARIOUS ISSUES RAISED. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR RE - ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTIC AL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30/07/2015. S D / - (N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S D / - ( GEORGE MATHAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE : PANAJI / GOA DATED : 30/07/ 201 5 *SSL* COPY TO : (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A) CONCERNED (4) CIT CONCERNED (5) D.R (6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY, BY ORDER , 4 ITA NOS. 231 & 232/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2004 - 05 & 2008 - 09) DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ORDER ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 30/07/2015 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 30/07/2015 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 3 1 /07/2015 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 3 1 /07/2015 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 3 1 /07/2015 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30/07/2015 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 3 1 /07/2015 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER