Shyam Corporation, Surat V. The Dy. CIT, Circle-2(3), Surat

ITA 530/SRT/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1149 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 26-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANUPAMA SINGLA SRDR
• Assessee Lawyers: P M JAGASHETH
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 80IB

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.530/SRT/2018 (AY 2014-15) (H EARING IN VIRTUAL COURT) M/S SHYAM CORPORATION, 39, VRAJ BHUMI TOWNSHIP MOJE; SIMADA GAM CHORYASI, SURAT. PAN : ABIFS 0262 M VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3), ROOM NO. 612, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT. APPLICANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY MR. P.M. JAGASHETH, CA REVENUE BY MS. ANUPAMA SINGLA, SR-DR DATE OF HEARING 02/07/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 02/07/2021 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : 1. THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, SURAT DATED 24.05.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2014-15. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE SUMMARIZED AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF THE INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.11,85,715/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S, 80IB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE SEAMED COMMISSIONER OF THE INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS NOT PROVIDED THE AMPLE OPPORTUNITIES TO HEAR THE CASE AND PASSED EX-PARTE ORDER, THE CASE MAY PLEASE SET ASIDE AND RESTORED BACK TO THE CIT (A). ITA NO.530/SRT/2018 (AY 2014-15 ) M/S SHYAM CORPORATION 2 3. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ABOVE ADDITION MAY PLEASE BE DELETED AS LEARNED MEMBERS OF THE TRIBUNAL MAY DEEM IT PROPER. 4. APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR DELETE ANY GROUND(S) EITHER BEFORE OR IN THE COURSE OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS COMPLETED ON 30.11.2016 UNDER SECTION 143(3). THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DISALLOWED THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB, BY TAKING VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEES CLAIMED IS FOUND INADMISSIBLE. ON APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS AFFIRMED. THE LD CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER IN EX-PARTE ORDER BY TAKING VIEW THAT DESPITE GRANTING A NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITY THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO COMPLY THE NOTICES. FURTHER AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL/ AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE (AR/ COUNSEL) FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE LEARNED SENIOR DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (SR DR) FOR THE REVENUE. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE NOTICES ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF LD CIT(A) WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSE HAS CHANGED HIS ADDRESS AND COULD NOT INFORMED NEW ADDRESS IN TIME. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT SIMILAR CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80IB(10) WAS ALLOWED IN APPEAL FOR AY 2012-13 BY TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 123/AHD/2016 DATED 31.08.2018 AND THAT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THE ASSESSEE HAS GOOD CASE ON MERIT AND IS LIKELY TO SUCCEED ITA NO.530/SRT/2018 (AY 2014-15 ) M/S SHYAM CORPORATION 3 IF THE ASSESSEE IS HEARD ON MERIT. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PRAYED TO RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILES OF LEARNED CIT(A), WITH THE DIRECTION TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND HE UNDERTAKE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO BE MORE VIGILANT IN FUTURE. THE LEARNED COUNSEL ALSO ASSURED THE BENCH TO FURNISH HIS EMAIL ADDRESS AS WELL AS TELEPHONE NUMBER FOR COMMUNICATION OF THE HEARING BEFORE LD. CIT(A). IN ALTERNATIVE SUBMISSION THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(A) IS NOT ON MERIT OF THE CASE AND THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) IS LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. SR. DR FOR THE REVENUE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN TWO OPPORTUNITY AS RECORDED IN PARA 5.1.1 OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE LD.CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) LEFT WITH NO OPTION, EXCEPT TO PROCEED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AND IN ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE OR EXPLANATION AFFIRM THE ACTION OF AO. THE LEARNED SR DR FOR THE REVENUE PRAYED FOR DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL. 5. IN ALTERNATIVE SUBMISSION, THE LD. SR. DR FOR THE REVENUE SUBMITS THAT IN CASE THE HONBLE BENCH DEEMS IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE BE DIRECTED TO BE VIGILANT AND NOT TO DEFAULT IN FUTURE IN ATTENDING THE PROCEEDINGS AND TO WASTE THE TIME OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES/LD.CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT TAKE THE PROCEEDING BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN CASUAL MANNER. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION OF LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE DR FOR THE REVENUE AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. ITA NO.530/SRT/2018 (AY 2014-15 ) M/S SHYAM CORPORATION 4 WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) FIXED THE HEARING ON TWO OCCASIONS AS MENTIONED IN PARA 5.1.1 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT IS RECORDED BY LD. CIT(A) THAT NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, FIND THAT THE LDCIT(A) THE NOTICES SENT FOR BOTH THE DATE OF HEARING WERE RETURN BACK UNSERVED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARK LEFT OR INCOMPLETE ADDRESS AS RECORDED IN PARA- 5.1.1 OF THE ORDER. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO CHANGE OF ADDRESS. THE LD COUNSEL ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AS SIMILAR RELIEF WAS ALLOWED BY TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL FOR AY 2012-13 (SUPRA). CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE DESERVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AT THE STAGE OF FIRST APPELLATE STAGE, ACCORDINGLY THE GROUNDS OF APPEA RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT(A) TO DECIDED ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AFRESH. WE ALSO FIND ONE MORE REASON TO RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF LD CIT(A) ORDER PASSED BY HIM IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANDATE OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT MANDATES THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL IS REQUIRED TO PASS ORDER ON POINTS OF DETERMINATION (GROUNDS OF APPEALS), DECISION THEREIN ON AND REASONS FOR SUCH DECISION. NEEDLESS TO ORDER THAT BEFORE PASSING THE ORDER THE LD. CIT(A) SHALL GRANT FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) AS AND WHEN THE DATE OF HEARING AND TO PROVIDE ALL NECESSARY EVIDENCE AND INFORMATION ITA NO.530/SRT/2018 (AY 2014-15 ) M/S SHYAM CORPORATION 5 WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAY AND NOT TO SEEK THE ADJOURNMENT WITHOUT ANY VALID REASONS. THE ASSESSEE IS FURTHER DIRECTED TO PROVIDE HIS E-MAIL ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER TO MAKE COMMUNICATION WITH HIM OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL FILE HIS LATEST ADDRESS AND E-MAIL ADDRESS AND HIS TELEPHONE NUMBER OR OF HIS REPRESENTATIVE, WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE IN THE OFFICE OF ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS BEFORE JURISDICTIONAL CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BY ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. NO ORDER AS TO COST. ORDER ANNOUNCED ON 02 ND JULY 2021 AT THE TIME OF HEARING IN VIRTUAL COURT HEARING. SD/- SD/- SSD/- SD/- (DR ARJUN LAL SAINI) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER SURAT, DATED: 02 /07/2021 SELF COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, SURAT