Atlas Systems Pvt Ltd., CHENNAI V. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 372/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9430 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 18-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PATHLAVATH PEERYA
• Assessee Lawyers: B RAMAKRISHNAN
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A B ENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . , % BEFORE SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . / I.T.A.NO.372/MDS/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 ) M/S. ATLAS SYSTEMS PVT.LTD., 110, NSIC STP, B-24, EKKADUTHANGAL, GUINDY INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, CHENNAI-600 032. VS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-I (1), CHENNAI. PAN:AAECA2777M (PETITIONER) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. B.RAMAKRISHNAN, C.A. /RESPONDENT BY : MR.PATHLAVATH PEERYA, CIT DR /DATE OF HEARING : 13 TH APRIL, 2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 TH APRIL, 2016 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY T HE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS)- 1, CHENNAI DATED 29.12.2015 IN ITA NO.281/14-15 PAS SED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 92CA OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS, HOWEVER THE CRUXES OF THE ISSUES ARE AS FOLLOWS:- I) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN PASSING THE ORDER WITHOUT 2 ITA NO.372/MDS/2016 CONSIDERING THE REVISED FORM 56F SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 22.12.2015. II) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN PASSING THE ORDER WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 46A ON 28.04.2014. III) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE AMOUNTING TO ` 2,39,20,217/- MADE BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 10A OF THE ACT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER RULE 46A. IV) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DENYING DEDUCTION OF ` 8,87,16,308/- OUT OF EXPORT TURNOVER SINCE THE SAME WAS NOT BROUGHT INTO INDIA WITHIN 6 MONTHS, IT WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10A OF THE ACT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER RULE 46A. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSES SEE COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SOFTWARE SERVICES FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ON 01.10. 2010 ADMITTING INCOME OF ` 7,27,110/- AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10A OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER THE LEARN ED ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SE CTION 143(3) R.W.S. 92CA OF THE ACT ON 28.03.2014 DENYING THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S. 10A OF THE ACT. ON APPEA L, THE 3 ITA NO.372/MDS/2016 LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) CONFIR MED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTA TIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS), WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL, HAS NOT A DMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE HIM ON 22.12.2 015 BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER RULE 46A BEING THE REVISED FORM 56F IN RELATION TO FOREIGN INWARD REMITTANCE CERTIFICATE T OWARDS ITS CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10A OF THE ACT. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED B ACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BE FORE HIM UNDER RULE 46A AND THE REVISED FORM 56F OF THE ACT AND THEREAFTER PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER AS PER LAW AND ME RIT. 4. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE L EARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND PLEADED THAT THE ORDE R OF THE 4 ITA NO.372/MDS/2016 LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) MAY BE CONFIRMED. 5. AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES AND PERUSING THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), IT IS APPARENT THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X (APPEALS) WITHOUT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM UNDE R RULE 46A WHICH IS THE REVISED FORM 56F FOR CLAIMING DEDU CTION UNDER SECTION 10A OF THE ACT, DECIDED THE ISSUE AGA INST THE ASSESSEE. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS IT HAD SUBMITTED THE SAME DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEED INGS. IN THIS SITUATION WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT T HE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE EXAMINED THESE DOCUMENTS BY ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND GRANTED RELIE F TO THE ASSESSEE IF IT IS ELIGIBLE FOR SUCH DEDUCTION. THER EFORE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BAC K TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRESH AS PER MERITS AND LAW AFT ER ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE 5 ITA NO.372/MDS/2016 UNDER RULE 46A. ACCORDINGLY ALL THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS APPEAL ARE DISPOSED OFF. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 29 TH APRIL, 2016 SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( . ) (N.R.S.GANESAN) ( A.MOHAN A LANKAMONY ) ! # / JUDICIAL MEMBER # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ! /CHENNAI, & /DATED 29 TH APRIL, 2016 SOMU *+ ,+ /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. - () /CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. + 1 /DR 6. /GF .