M/s Shri ji Ware House, V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-I,

ITA 38/JAB/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5603 (ITAT-JABALPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 12-03-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D R LATHORIYA
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI , HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 38 / J AB /201 5 (ASST. YEAR : 20 1 0 - 11 ) M/S. SHRI JI WARE HOUSE, VILLAGE DAMADLIYA, TEHSIL SEONI, MALWA, DIST. HOSHANGABAD. VS. ITO, WARD - 1 , ITARSI . PAN NO. ABCFS 4841 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE . DEPARTMENT BY : S HRI D.R. LATHORIYA - DR DATE OF HEARING : 07 / 0 4 /201 6 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07 / 04 /201 6 . O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 1, BHOPAL , DATED 15 / 1 2/201 4 . 2. THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SHRI P.K. DIASHWAL , ADVOCATE HAS FILED AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT OF HEARING AS HE IS NOT IN A POSITION TO ATTEND THE HEARING. THE BENCH WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE CAN BE DISPOSED OF IN ABSENCE OF THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. THEREFORE, THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. 2 ITA NO. 38 / JAB /201 5 3 . IN THIS APPEAL , THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT THE APPELLANT IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SEC. 80IB(11A) OF THE ACT AND ACCORDINGLY SHOULD HAVE DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW THE DEDUCTION UNDER THAT SEC. 2 CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT HAS INCURRED TRANSPORT EXPENSE OF RS. 1,10,252/ - HENCE THE CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE DELETED THIS DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY APPLYING THE PROVISION OF SEC. 80IB(11A) OF THE ACT. 3 THE CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOT TO DEDUCT THE SUBSIDY OF RS. 14,48,151/ - RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT FROM THE WDV OF WARE HOUSE FOR WORKING OF DEPRECIATION ON GODOWN AND SHOULD HAVE DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION OF RS.1,44,816/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4 THE CIT(A) ORDER DATED 15/12/2014 IS BAD IN LAW HENCE MAY K IDNLY BE CANCELLED. 4 . A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PUT IN APPEARANCE ON THE DATE S OF HEARING FIXED ON 04/07/2014, 21/07/2014, 14/08/2014, 11/11/2014 & 09/12/2014 . WE FIND THAT THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. VS. ITAT & OTHERS IN W.P.NO. 1740/2013 , ORDER DATED 23/09/2013 HAS HELD THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NO POWER TO DISMISS APPEAL FOR NON - APPEARANCE OF APPELLANT. IT HAS TO DEAL WITH THE MERITS. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE TO DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE ON MERITS AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 3 ITA NO. 38 / JAB /201 5 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THURSDAY , THE 0 7 TH DAY OF APRIL , 201 6 AT JABALPUR . S D/ - SD/ - ( N.K. CHOUDHRY ) (N.S.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER D ATED : 07 TH APRIL , 201 6 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESS E E. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE D.R . 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER