Anujsoft India Private Ltd., CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 2597/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 259721714 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 02-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 14-10-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A B KOLI
• Assessee Lawyers: K RAVI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI , . ! ' , # '$ BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER . /ITA NO. 2597/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 M/S. ANJUSOFT INDIA PRIVATE LTD., OLD NO.10/10, NEW NO.14, HARI OM COLONY, WEST VANNIYAR STREET, CHENNAI - 600 092. PAN AAFCA6878C ( /APPELLANT) V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-I(2), CHENNAI. RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI K. RAVI, ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.B.KOLI, JCIT ! / DATE OF HEARING : 02.11.2015 '# ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.11.2015 % / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) DATED 27 .2.2014. 2. THE FIRST GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGARD TO VIOLATIVE OF PRINCIPLES OF EQUITY AND NATURAL JUSTI CE ON THE REASON - - ITA 2597/14 2 THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) DECIDE D THE APPEAL, EX PARTE, AS THERE WAS NO SERVICE OF NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE. THE OTHER GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S.10B OF THE ACT ON THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO CONFI RM WHETHER THE APPROVAL GRANTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER WA S RATIFIED BY THE BOARD OF APPROVAL ON EOU SCHEME. 3. THERE IS A DELAY OF 35 DAYS IN FILING THIS APPEA L BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A CONDONATION PET ITION EXPLAINING THE DELAY THAT THERE WAS CHANGE OF COUNS EL FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. NEW COUNSEL, SHRI K. RAVI TOOK TIME TO DRAFT THE APPEAL AND REPRESENT THE SAME BEF ORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH RESULTED IN A DELAY OF 35 DAYS. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE CONDONDATION PETITION FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE. WE FIND THAT THE REASON ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THE APPEAL BELATEDLY BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IS BONA FIDE AND THER E EXISTS GOOD AND SUFFICIENT REASON TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILIN G THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE DELAY IS CONDONED AND THE APPEAL I S ADMITTED FOR ADJUDICATION. 4. AS FAR AS THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL IS CONCERNE D, WE FIND THAT IN THIS CASE, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(A PPEALS) - - ITA 2597/14 3 DECIDED THE APPEAL EX PARTE WITHOUT PARTICIPATION O F THE ASSESSEE OR THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL. THE COMMISSIONER OF INC OME- TAX(APPEALS) RECORDED IN PARAGRAPH 2 OF HIS ORDER T HAT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE A SSESSEE ATTENDED THE HEARING. NO CORRESPONDENCE WAS RECEIV ED SEEKING ADJOURNMENT AND THE CASE WAS DECIDED ON MERITS BASE D ON THE FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 5. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT NOTICE OF HEARING WAS NOT SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AND THE LD. DR HAS NOT FILED ANY EVIDENCE SUGGESTING SERVICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING, B EFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) TO THE ASSESSEE . 6. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN OUR OPINION, THE ASSE SSEE WAS PREVENTED IN PROSECUTING THE ASSESSEES CASE BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS). THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO REMIT THE ENTIRE I SSUE TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) TO GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT ITS CASE. IF THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO AVAIL THE OPPORTUNITY GIVEN BY TH E COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE HIM, THEN THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) I S AT LIBERTY TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LA W. - - ITA 2597/14 4 ACCORDINGLY, WE REMIT THE ENTIRE ISSUE IN DISPUTE B ACK TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) FOR FRES H CONSIDERATION AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. SINCE, WE HAVE REMITTED THE ENTIRE ISSUE IN DISPUTE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX( APPEALS) FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION, AT THIS STAGE, WE REFRAIN FROM GOING TO THE OTHER ISSUES ON MERITS BEFORE US. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY, THE 2 ND OF NOV., 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( $% & ) ( ' ( ) $ ) *%+,-,./01,2345,.62,+778,293 : ;< /JUDICIAL MEMBER ! ;<=>>70.?,.?@A1BA2 ': /CHENNAI, C; /DATED, THE 2 ND NOV., 2015. MPO* ;D EFGF /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. H3 /CIT(A) 4. H /CIT 5. FIJ K /DR 6. JLM /GF.