M/s. McML ECI JOINT VENTURE, Bangalore V. ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhubaneswar

ITA 422/CTK/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2937 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 4 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-04-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 31-12-0000
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 40(a)(ia); 194C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE MANISH AGARWAL M/s. McML ECI Joint Venture,C-9, Industrial Estate, Yelahanka, Bangalore-560064 PAN/GIR No (Appellant Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ord CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, assessment year 2. None appeared for appeared for the revenue. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.422/CTK/2019 Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/s. McML ECI Joint 9, Industrial Estate, Yelahanka, 560064 Vs. ITO, Bhubaneswar PAN/GIR No.AABAM 1277 H (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT Date of Hearing : 18/0 Date of Pronouncement : 18/0 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ord 1, Bhubaneswar, dated 30.8.2019 in Appeal No. assessment year 2014-15. appeared for the assessee and Shri Sanjay Kumar, ld appeared for the revenue. Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhubaneswar Respondent) Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR 04/2024 /04/2024 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld in Appeal No.0399/16-17 for the Sanjay Kumar, ld CIT DR ITA No.422/CTK/2019 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Page2 | 3 3. We have heard ld CIT DR. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that the ld CIT(Appeal-1) has passed the order exparte without the representation from the side of the assessee despite giving various opportunities. The only issue involved in the appeal is against the confirmation of disallowance of Rs.8,02,17,911/- u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. Perusal of the impugned order also shows that the CIT (A) has confirmed the addition as no materials or evidences could not be filed before him to support that the expenditure of Rs.8,02,17,911/- is not coming under the purview of section 194C for which section 40(a)(ia) has no implication on such payment. Perusal of the appeal records also shows that the assessee had requested for transfer of the file from Cuttack to Bangalore to pursue his case but the same has not been acceded to as the Assessing Officer in this case is from Cuttack. In view of above, in order to render substantial justice, we deem it fit and proper to remit the matter back to the file of the ld CIT(A) to readjudicate the issues in the appeal afresh after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear suomoto before the ld CIT(A) and present his case with necessary documents and evidences. With these directions, the appeal is restored back to the file of the ld CIT(A). ITA No.422/CTK/2019 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Page3 | 3 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 18/04/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 18/04/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : M/s. McML ECI Joint Venture,C-9, Industrial Estate, Yelahanka, Bangalore-560064 2. The Respondent: ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhubaneswar 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-1, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//