M/s. Ethan Textile India Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly Known as M/s. R. Kumar Spuntex Pvt. Ltd.), Ahmedabad V. DCIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 291/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9655 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 06-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: L P JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: BIREN SHAH
• Keywords: Depreciation; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence
• Section: 142(1); 143(2); 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTING THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.291/AHD/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2014-15) M/S. ETHAN TE XTILE INDIA PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. R. KUMAR SPUNTEX PVT. LTD.) 3701,PHASE-IV, GIDC, VATVA, AHMEDABAD-382445 VS. DCIT CIRCLE-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD [PAN NO. AAACR9259F] ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI BIREN SHAH, AR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI L. P. JAIN , SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 28/07/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29/07/2021 O R D E R PER MS. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 13.11.2017 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-7, AHMEDABAD AR ISING OUT OF THE ORDER DATED 03.10.2016 PASSED BY THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), AHME DABAD UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS TO T HE ACT) FOR A.Y. 2014-15. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE INSTANT APPEAL THE LD. COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE ADDITIONAL EV IDENCE WERE THOUGH PLACED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE SAME WAS NOT ADMITTED AND THE AD DITION MADE BY THE LD. AO HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. I N THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER HE PRAYS FOR SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR PROPER ADJUDICATION OF THE MATTER UPON ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). - 2 - ITA NO.291/AHD/2018 M/S. ETHAN TEXTILE INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. DCI T A.Y. 2014-15 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES AND WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 5. IT APPEARS FROM THE RECORDS THAT BEFORE THE FIRS T APPELLATE AUTHORITY A WRITTEN SUBMISSION WAS FILED ALONG WITH CERTAIN DETAILS AND DOCUMENTS IN RESPECT OF THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION MADE BY THE APPELLANT. RELEVANT TO MENTION THAT NONE OF THESE DOCUMENTS WAS PLACED BEFORE THE LD. AO. FURTHERMOR E, NO REQUEST OR SUBMISSION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLA TE AUTHORITY SEEKING ADMISSION OF THOSE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS, HOWEVER, FAILED TO SATISFY US AS TO WHY NO SUCH APP LICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A WAS FILED BEFORE THE LD. CI T(A) ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT. IT FURTHER APPEARS FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AUT HORITIES BELOW THAT NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) AND 142(1) OF THE ACT ALONG WITH QUE STIONNAIRE AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE APPELLANT BUT THE APPELLANT CHOSE NOT TO COMPLY WITH THE SAME. NEITH ER THE DETAILS, AS REGARDS THE DEPRECIATION OF CLAIM WERE FURNISHED DURING THE ASS ESSMENT PROCEEDING. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE ENTIRE ASPECT OF THE MATTER THE L D. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO. 6. IN FACT, WE TOO ARE NOT SATISFIED ABOUT THE COND UCT OF THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW; THE LACHES GALORE ON THE PART OF THE APPELLANT IS GLARING. EVEN AFTER THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO, THE APPELLANT WAS NOT CAREFUL ENOUGH TO SUBMIT THE RELEVANT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES BY WAY OF STATUTORY A PPLICATION UNDER RULE 46A BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR PROPER ADJUDICATI ON OF THE ISSUE. SUCH LACKADAISICAL APPROACH OF THE APPELLANT IS NOT APPRECIATED BY US. HOWEVER, WE FOR THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY T O THE APPELLANT TO GET ITS MATTER HEARD AND ADJUDICATED BY THE LD. CIT(A). THUS, THE ISSUE IS SET-ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION OF THE SAME. THE LD. CIT(A) IS FURTHER DIRECTED TO - 3 - ITA NO.291/AHD/2018 M/S. ETHAN TEXTILE INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. DCI T A.Y. 2014-15 PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE AND TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WHICH THE ASSESSEE MAY CHO OSE TO FILE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. HOWEVER, SUCH APPEAL IS TO BE ENTERTAINED BY THE LD . CIT(A) SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF COST OF RS. 8,000/- BY THE APPELLANT. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 29/07/2021 SD/- SD/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (MS. MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 29/07/2021 TANMAY / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE PCIT- AHMEDABAD. 5. , ! ' , #$%% / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. &' () / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) !, #$ / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION 28.07.2021 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 29.07.2021 3. OTHER MEMBER. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S .07.2021 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S. 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 29 .07.2021 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER