M/s Sai Krushi Constructions (P) Ltd, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward 3(1), Hyderabad

ITA 298/HYD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 29822514 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 26-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B RAMA KRISHNA
• Keywords: Non-deduction of tax
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NO.298/HYD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 M/S. SAI KRUSHI CONSTRUCTIONS (P) LTD., HYDERABAD. PAN AAECS3662D VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : MR. K.C. DEVDAS FOR REVENUE : MR. B. RAMAKRISHNA DATE OF HEARING : 01.10.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.10.2014 ORDER PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), GUNTUR DATED 23.11.2012 FO R THE A.Y. 2006-07, IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESS ING OFFICER. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE COMPA NY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A.Y. 2006-07 DEC LARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.3,57,176. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO ASSESSEE TO EXAMINE THE GENUINENESS OF THE EXPENSES CLAIMED BY IT. MANY NOTICES WERE SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE BUT THERE WAS NO RESPONSE BY THE ASSESSEE TO SUCH NOTICES. IN VIE W OF THE SAME, A.O. COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND MADE THE ADDITION UNDER 2 ITA.NO.298/HYD/2014 M/S. SAI KRUSHI CONSTRUCTIONS (P) LTD., HYDERABAD SECTION 68 OF THE I.T. ACT AND ALSO DISALLOWANCE UN DER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE I.T. ACT FOR NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE ON THE AUDIT FEE PAID AND BROUGHT THEM TO TAX. AGGRIEV ED, ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), LD. CIT(A) ALSO ISSUED NOTICES TO THE ASSESSEE FOR HEARINGS ON VARI OUS DATES OVER A SPAN OF NEARLY 3 YEARS, BUT ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR NOR DID IT SUBMIT REQUISITE DETAILS. IN VIEW OF THE SAM E, LD. CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY A.O. AND AGGRI EVED ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 3. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MR. K.C. DEVDAS SUBMITTED THAT THE REASONS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF NO TICES BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE A.O. AS WELL AS THE LD. CIT (A) WAS THAT ASSESSEE HAD, FOR THE FIRST TIME TAKEN-UP CONTRACTS OUTSIDE THE STATE VIZ., IN MADHYA PRADESH AND DUE TO CERTAIN RE ASONS, DEPOSITS MADE BY ASSESSEE WITH THE CONCERNED DEPART MENTS HAD BEEN FORTIFIED AND ASSESSEE WAS IN GREAT TROUBL E. HE SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS FOR THESE REASONS, THAT THE A SSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND P RAYED FOR AN OTHER OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES. 4. LD. D.R. HOWEVER, DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE IN NOT COMPLYING WITH THE N OTICES OF THE AUTHORITIES AND SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS GIV EN AMPLE OPPORTUNITIES TO PUT FORTH HIS CASE, BUT, IN SPITE OF IT, ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES AND THE REFORE, THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) SHOULD NOT BE INTERFERED WITH. 5. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE NOTICES OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN SPITE OF SEVERA L OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN BY THEM. HOWEVER, TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THA T ASSESSEE 3 ITA.NO.298/HYD/2014 M/S. SAI KRUSHI CONSTRUCTIONS (P) LTD., HYDERABAD HAD FOR THE FIRST TIME TAKEN CONTRACTS OUTSIDE THE STATE AND WAS IN DIFFICULTIES, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO R EMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF A.O. SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION T HAT THE ASSESSEE PAYS A FINE OF RS.10,000 (RS. TEN THOUSAND ONLY) TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTICES. N EEDLESS TO SAY THAT ASSESSEE SHALL COOPERATE WITH THE A.O. FOR SPEEDY COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT AND SHALL NOT SEEK UN- NECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS. ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSEES GROUND IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01.10.2014. SD/- SD/- (P.M.JAGTAP) (SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 01 ST OCTOBER, 2014. VBP/- COPY TO 1. M/S. SAI KRUSHI CONSTRUCTIONS (P) LTD., MIG-561, B.H.E.L. RAMACHANDRA PURAM, HYDERABAD 502 032. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), I.T. TOWERS, SHANTI NAGAR, A.C. GUARDS, MASAB TANK, HYDERABAD. 3. CIT(A), GUNTUR. 4. CIT-III, HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT A BENCH, HYDERABAD