Mekaster International Private Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4424/DEL/2016

AI Insights

Mekaster International Pvt. Ltd. filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -XX, New Delhi, which arose from the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2011-12. The primary issues in the appeal included the disallowance of interest on borrowed capital, service tax, TDS payable, and other expenses under Section 43-B of the Act. The CIT (A) and the Tribunal both noted the assessee's non-cooperation and failure to provide necessary submissions or evidence to substantiate their claims, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 121517 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 28-02-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 11-08-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 113

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No.4424/DEL/2016 Assessment Year 2011-12 Mekaster International Pvt. Ltd., 908, Ansal Bhawan, K.G. Marg, New Delhi. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1), New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AACCM2202M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Shri Pankaj Khanna, Sr.DR Date of hearing: 01 03 2022 Date of pronouncement: 07 03 2023 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: T he capti oned app eal has b ee n f il ed b y the A sse ssee a gainst the order of t he C ommiss ione r of In come T ax (A ppea ls) -X X, N ew D elhi (‘ C IT (A )’ in s h ort ) da ted 23. 03.2 016 aris ing from the assess me nt orde r dat ed 31. 03. 20 14 pass ed by th e Assessing O fficer under Secti on 143 (3) of t he I nco me T ax A c t, 1961 (the A ct) c onc er ning A Y 2011- 12. 2. T he grou nds of appea l ra ised b y the assesse e read as unde r: “ 1 . T he o r d e r of t h e A s s e s s i ng O f f i c e r i s e r r o n e ou s o f t he f a c ts an d la w . O n t h e f a c t s a n d c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t he c as e he ou g h t t o h av e ac c e p te d t h e r e t u r n e d in c o m e . 2. Th e L d. C I T w a s n ot j us t i f i e d i n di s p o s i n g of A pp e al b y n ot gi v i n g a ny r e li e f . 3. T ha t d ue t o c e r t a in u na v o i d a bl e c i r c u m s t a n c e s t he A s s e s s e e I.T.A No.4424/Del/2016 2 C o m p an y w a s n o t i n a p o s i t i on t o f i l e t h e ne c e s s a r y s u bm i s s i on i n s up p or t o f G r o u nd o f Ap p e a l . 4. Th e l e ar ne d a s s e s s i ng o f f i c e r i s n ot j u s t i f i e d in di s al l o w i n g t he in t e r e s t o n b o r r ow e d c a pi t a l . Th e A s s e s s e e ha s s u f fi c ie n t r e a s on t o ad v an c e s t h e m on e y t o t h e i r a s s o c i at e s c o nc e r ns . 5. Th e Ld . A s s e s s i n g of f i c e r is n ot j us t i f i e d i n dis al l o w a n c e of Se r v i c e Ta x , TD S p a y a b le a n d o t he r p a y a b l e e x pe n s e s u / s 4 3- B . 6 T he l d . A s s e s s i n g O f fi c e r is n ot j u s t i f i e d i n d i sal l o w a n c e of c e r t ai n e x p e ns e s . T he A s s e s s e e h as s u f f i c i e n t e v i d enc e to t he pr o d uc e f o r s a i d c l a i m s . 7. A n y ot h e r g r ou nd o r gr ou nd s a s m a y be u r ge d a t th e t im e of he a r i n g . ” 3. When th e matter w as cal le d for hearing, none appea re d for the assessee. It is seen from t he record t ha t mul tipl e op portunit ies have been given t o the assessee t he re for e, we are constrai nt to proceed ex -parte. 4. T he asses s ment order w as per use d and i t w as found that certa in a ddi ti ons w ere made on acc ount of disal lowance t ow ards advan ces, interest exp ens es, admini st rati ve a nd se lli ng expenses and so o n. T he ret urned income o f Rs. 1, 14, 79, 134/ - w as accordi ngl y a ssess ed at Rs. 3,2 8, 73, 113 /-. 5. A gai nst the aforesai d ass ess me nt passe d un der S ect ion 143(3) o f t he A ct, the ass essee prefe rr ed a ppeal befo re the CIT (A ). H ow ever, the CIT (A ) dec lined t o grant an y reli ef to the assessee ow ing to the f ac t that the assessee was totall y non- coope ra tive d espi t e se veral oppo rtuni ti es. In the abse nce of a n y re butt al to t he obs er vati ons made b y the Assess ing O ffi cer agai nst the ass essee, the l d. C IT (A) d id not see an y reas on t o in te rfere w ith the f indin gs gi ve n in the asses sment order. The C IT (A) t hus passed ex-par te order co nfi rming t he acti on of th e Assessing O fficer. 6. Befo re the T ri bu nal as w e ll, the assess ee has remained I.T.A No.4424/Del/2016 3 indolent an d n oncha la nt. N one appea re d a nd no mate rial w as place d to su pport the gri evances ra ised i n t he a pp ea l des pi te s ix opportunit ies. 7. It is thus note d t hat in th e pres ent c ase, r ig ht fro m t he fi rst appel late st age, th e ass essee h as s how ed ine xpl ica bl e indifference to the a pp eals fi led b y it both be fo re the C IT (A) as w ell T ribuna l. N umbe r of o pportunit ies were given by t he CIT (A ) as w ell as by the ITA T . The ass essee di d n ot ca re to f ile an y repl y. In abs enc e of any re but tal, t he C IT (A ) pro ceeded fur th er w it h the appea l ex - par te and dec ided t he a ppea l on me rits an d confi rmed the orde r passed b y t he Assessing O fficer by conf ir mi ng the addi ti ons / dis al low ances under chal lenge. 8. O n going t hr ough t he o rde rs pass ed by the A ssessing O f fi ce r as w ell as t he ld. C IT (A), w e are of the opi ni on t hat i n t he abse nce of any explan at ion by t he assess ee on t he iss ues i nvolv ed, the CIT (A ) was j ust i fi ed i n c onf ir mi ng s uch addi t io ns / d is allow ance. The ass essee has cont in ued i ts supine in di ffe re nce be fore th e Trib una l. We thus fi nd no mi ti ga ti ng circums tance s in t he p resent case t o inter fe re w ith the order o f the l ow er aut horities. H ence, we decli ne t o inter fe re . 9. In the res ul t, the appeal of t he asses see is dismi sse d. Order pronounced in the open Court on 07/03/2023. Sd/- Sd/- [CHANDRA MOHAN GARG] [PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: /03/2023 Prabhat