M/s. Galaxy Granites Pvt Ltd., CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 2909/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4909 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 05-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYA PAL
• Keywords: Gift; Depreciation; Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 14A; 32

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI , . , # $ BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 2909/MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S. GALAXY GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED, NO. 36, C.P. RAMASWAMY ROAD, ALWARPET, CHENNAI 600 018. [PAN: AAACG 1198E] VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE -2, CHENNAI. ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) & ' / APPELLANT BY : NONE *+& ' / RESPONDENT BY : MR. SUPRIYA PAL, JCIT ' /DATE OF HEARING : 05.04.2017 ' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.04.2017 /O R D E R PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-6, CHENNAI IN ITA NO. 153/CIT(A)- 6/2015-16 DATED 20.07.2016 PASSED U/S. 143(3) AND 2 50 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. :-2-: I.T.A. NO. 2909/MDS/2016 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 2.1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE P ERMITTED TO PRODUCE ANY ADDITION EVIDENCE WHICH WERE NOT PRODUC ED BY HIM BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ERRED IN CONFIRMIN G THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE SECURITY ASSES SING OFFICER U/S. 143(3) AMOUNTING TO RS. 8,61,446/-. 2.2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES UNDER RULE 46A FI LED BEFORE HIM BY GETTING REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND WOULD HAVE DECIDED THE APPEAL IN MERITS. 2.3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 3,13,500/- CLAIMED BY THE A PPELLANT UNDER SECTION 32 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 TOWARDS DEPR ECIATION. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR AND CONSIDER ED THE ASSESSEE GROUNDS AND DECIDED THE APPEAL. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURIN G AND EXPORTERS OF GRANITES MONUMENT ARTIFACTS AND FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ON 30.09.2012 WITH TOTAL IN COME OF :-3-: I.T.A. NO. 2909/MDS/2016 RS.63,02,920/-. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICE U/S. 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED. IN COMPL IANCE TO NOTICE, LD. AR APPEARED FROM TIME TO TIME AND FILED THE DETAILS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER BASED ON THE DETAILS AND DISCUSSIONS WITH LD. AR MA DE (I) DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE U/S. 14A R.W.R. 8D OF THE INCOME TAX RU LES RS. 58,888/- (II) DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION OF CAR PURCHASED IN TH E NAME OF COMPANY'S DIRECTOR RS. 3,13,500/- AND (III) DISALLOWANCE OF U NEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE RS. 8,61,446/- AND ASSESSED THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 75,36,754/- AND PASSED ORDER U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 25.03.201 5. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A N APPEAL WITH THE CIT(A). IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. AR A RGUED THE GROUNDS AND REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS AND FILED WRITTEN SUBMIS SIONS. THE LD. CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, G ROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND SUBMISSIONS AND JUDICIAL DECISIONS DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE U/S. 14A OF THE ACT AND CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE ON DEPRECIAT ION ON MOTOR VEHICLE RS. 3,13,500/- RELYING ON JUDICIAL DECISIONS. FURT HER, THE LD. CIT(A) FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM OF RS. 8,61,446/- AS BUSINESS GIFTS WITH EVIDENCE AND SUPPORTING BILLS. THE LD. CIT(A) IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE THOUGH CLAIMED THE DEDUCT ION BUT COULD NOT PLACE :-4-: I.T.A. NO. 2909/MDS/2016 ON RECORD ANY PROOF OF VALID CLAIM AND ACCORDINGLY DISMISS THE ASSESSEE GROUND AND PARTLY ALLOW THE APPEAL 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE CIT(A) ORDER, THE ASSESSEE FILE D AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF TH E ASSESSEE AND THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE APPEAL BE DISMISSED. 6. WE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. DR AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE HA S RAISED THE GROUNDS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT PERMITTING TO PROD UCE ANY ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WHICH WAS NOT PRODUCED BEFORE ASSESSING OF FICER AND PRAYED FOR ADMISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ON CLAIM OF RS . 8,61,446/- UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 46A OF THE IT RULES. CONSIDERIN G THE APPARENT FACTS AND MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE OPINION ON THE PR INCIPLES OF THE NATURAL JUSTICE, THOUGH THE ASSESSEE FOR VARIOUS REASONS CO ULD NOT SUBMIT THE DETAILS OF CLAIM WITH EVIDENCE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT MADE A SUBSTANTIVE GROUND BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL FOR ADMITTIN G THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A OF THE IT RULES. WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE PROVIDED ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM BEFORE THE CIT(A) WITH EVIDENCE. ACCORDINGLY, IN T HE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE REMIT THE ENTIRE DISPUTED ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR ADMITTING THE :-5-: I.T.A. NO. 2909/MDS/2016 ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS , AND THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE PROVIDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BEFORE DISPOSAL OF APPEAL ON MERITS ALLOW THE APPEAL FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSE. 7. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR ST ATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- ( . ) (G. PAVAN KUMAR) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 0 /DATED: 10TH APRIL, 2017. JPV ' *#23 43 /COPY TO: 1. &/ APPELLANT 2. *+& /RESPONDENT 3. 5 ( )/CIT(A) 4. 5 /CIT 5. 3 *## /DR 6. 9 /GF