, , 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.NOS.2396,2397 & 2398 /MDS./2014 ( ! '! / ASSESSMENT YEARS :2003-04,2005-06 & 2006-07) M/S.TECHMAT ENTERPRISES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., 92A,SIDCO INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AMBATTUR, CHENNAI 6008. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-III(2), CHENNAI. PAN AAACT 7635 H ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) #$ % & / APPELLANT BY : MR.V.S.JAYAKUMAR,ADVOCATE '(#$ % & / RESPONDENT BY : MR.P.RADHAKRISHNAN,JCIT, D.R ) * % +, / DATE OF HEARING : 08.06.2015 -' % +, /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.08.2015 / O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THESE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE , A GGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A)-III, CHENNAI ITA NO.2396, 2397 & 2398 /MDS/2014 2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 IN ITA NO.1290/2013 -14 & FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 & 2006-07 IN ITA NO.1334 & 1018/2013- 14 BOTH THE ORDER DATED 21.07.2014, PASSED UNDER SE CTION 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT. SINCE MOST OF THE ISSUES IN ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE COMMON IN NATURE, THEY ARE CLUBBED & HEARD TOGE THER AND DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CO NVENIENCE. 2. IN ALL THE THREE APPEALS THE ASSESSEE HAS CHAL LENGED THE VALIDITY OF REOPENING U/S.147 OF THE ACT. AT THE O UTSET, THE LD. A.R SUBMITTED THAT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 & 2 006-07, THE ASSESSEE HAD CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF REOPENING U /S.147 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A), HOWEVER, HE HAD NOT ADJUDIC ATED THE SAME IN HIS ORDER. FURTHER, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 , THE ASSESSEE BY OVERSIGHT DID NOT RAISE THIS GROUND BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A), HOWEVER FOR THE FIRST TIME IT IS RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL SIN CE IT IS A LEGAL ISSUE. THE LD. A.R. FURTHER PLEADED BEFORE US THAT THE MAT TER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT (A) FOR ADJUDI CATION. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IF THE BENCH DESIRES TO REMIT BACK T HE MATTER, THEN THE BENCH MAY REMIT BACK THE OTHER ISSUES ALSO TO THE F ILE OF LD. CIT (A) ITA NO.2396, 2397 & 2398 /MDS/2014 3 FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE WAS NO T GRANTED PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE LD. D.R COULD NOT CONTROVERT TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. A.R BECAUSE THE LD. CIT (A) H AD NOT ADJUDICATED THE GROUND RAISED WITH RESPECT TO REOPE NING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S.147 OF THE ACT. HOWEVER HE SUBMITTED THAT THE REVENUE IN BOTH THE OCCASIONS HAD OFFERED SUFFICIEN T OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. 3. AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES AND CONSIDERING THE IN TRICACIES OF THE ISSUES INVOLVES IN ALL THE APPEALS, WE ARE OF THE C ONSIDERED VIEW THAT ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE REQUIRED TO BE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT (A) FOR DENOVO CONSIDERATION IN ORDER TO ADJUDICATE ALL THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGL Y, ALL THE APPEALS ARE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A) FO R FRESH CONSIDERATION. WE ALSO HEREBY DIRECT THE LD.CIT(A) TO GRANT SUFFIC IENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD AND ALSO DIRECT THE ASS ESSEE TO CO- OPERATE WITH THE REVENUE IN THEIR PROCEEDINGS IN OR DER TO EXPEDITE THEIR ORDERS. ITA NO.2396, 2397 & 2398 /MDS/2014 4 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEALS FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 5 TH AUGUST, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( N.R.S.GANESAN ) ( . '#$ %' ) (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 5 TH AUGUST, 2015. 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