Asia Pacific International, Tirupur V. DCIT Circle 1, Tirupur

ITA 3110/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3033 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 20-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: V S JAYAKUMAR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , , ' # BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.3110/CHNY/2017 & '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S ASIA PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL, NO.736, P.N. ROAD, TIRUPUR 641 602. PAN : AAEFA 9605 K V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, TIRUPUR. ()*/ APPELLANT) (+,)*/ RESPONDENT) )* - . / APPELLANT BY : SHRI V.S. JAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE +,)* - . / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT / - 0' / DATE OF HEARING : 02.08.2018 12' - 0' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.08.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -3, COIMBA TORE, DATED 23.05.2016 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THERE WAS A DELAY OF 471 DAYS IN FILING THE APPE AL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A PETITION FOR CON DONATION OF DELAY. HAVING HEARD THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND TH E LD. D.R., THIS 2 I.T.A. NO.3110/CHNY/17 TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE WA S SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN SPECIFIED TIME. T HEREFORE, THE DELAY OF 471 DAYS IS HEREBY CONDONED AND THE APPEAL IS AD MITTED. 3. NOW COMING TO THE MERIT OF THE APPEAL, THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 4. SHRI V.S. JAYAKUMAR, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE RECIPIENT HAS ALREADY PAID TAX. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, IN VIEW OF PROVISO TO SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT, THERE CANNOT BE ANY DISALLOWANCE. 5. WE HEARD SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. THE FACT WHETHER THE RECIPIEN T HAS PAID THE TAX HAS TO BE VERIFIED AND ASCERTAINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINI ON THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER IN TH E LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL THAT MAY BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORD INGLY, ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE IS SUE OF DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SE CTION 40(A)(IA) 3 I.T.A. NO.3110/CHNY/17 OF THE ACT IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER AND F IND OUT WHETHER THE RECIPIENT HAS PAID THE TAX ON THE AMOUNT RECEIV ED FROM THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE A SSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 10 TH AUGUST, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 10 TH AUGUST, 2018. KRI. - +056 76'0 /COPY TO: 1. )*/ APPELLANT 2. +,)*/ RESPONDENT 3. / 80 () /CIT(A)-3, COIMBATORE 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-3, COIMBATORE 5. 69 +0 /DR 6. :& ; /GF.