M/s JSR Logistics , Ballari V. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1 , Bellary

ITA 542/BANG/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3335 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 04-03-2020
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R PREMI
• Assessee Lawyers: SIVA PRASAD REDDY IRS RETD
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO .542 /BANG /201 9 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 13 - 14 ) M/S JSR LOGISTICS, NO.82, NOOR, MANZIL , HUSSAIN NAGAR, RAGHAVENDRA COLONY, 1ST STAGE, BALLARI - 583 101 VS. THE A CIT , CIRCLE - 1 , AAYAKAR BHAVAN, STAFF ROAD, BA LLARI - 583 102 PAN/GIR NO. A AHF2764M ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : S HRI SIVA P RASAD REDDY, IRS (RETD.) RESPO NDENT BY : S MT. R.PREMI, JCIT DATE OF HEARING 0 4 - 0 3 - 2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 06 - 03 - 2020 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA : AM THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HA S BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) , GULBA RGA DATED 2 8 - 09 - 2018 ARISING FROM THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED BY THE AO UNDER SEC.143(3) R.W.S.144 OF THE IT ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) CONCERNING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14. 2. A S PER ITS GROUNDS OF APPEAL , T HE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT TO ASSAIL THE ORD ER OF CIT(A) ON MANY GROUNDS WHICH INTER - ALIA IN C LUDES VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF ITA NO .5 4 2(B)/201 9 2 NATURAL JUSTICE AS A CONSEQUENCE OF NON - CONSIDERATI O N OF REMAND REPORT FROM THE A O IN THE FACTS OF THE C A SE. 3. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL , THE LD.AR F OR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED AT THE OUTSET, THAT THIS APPEAL IS BELATED AND SOUGHT CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 85 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIB U NAL. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE DELAY HAS OCCURRED BECAUSE THE ASSESSE HAD MOVED CER TAIN RECTIFICATION PETITION UNDER SEC.154 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THUS ENTERTAINED A BELIEF THAT GRIEVANCE WI LL BE S H O R TED OUT BY THE CIT(A). HOWEVER, WHEN THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION WAS NOT DISPOSED OF WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME , THE ASSESSEE M OVED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WITHOUT WAITING FURTHER . WE FIND THAT SUFFICIENT CAUSE HAS BEEN SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AND THUS, IT DESERVES CONDONATION OF DELAY. NO PREJUDICE HAS CAUSED TO THE REVENUE BY SUCH SMALL DELAY AND HENCE, THE DELAY IS CONDONED. 4. AT THE FURTHER OUTSET, THE LD. A R FOR THE ASSE S SEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSMENT IN THE PRESENT CASE WAS CARRIED OUT EX - PARTE UNDER SEC.144 OF THE ACT. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE EX - PARTE ORDER MAKING HUGE ADDITIONS IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESS EE , THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND REQUISITE EVIDENCES WER E ALSO PLACED BEFORE THE CIT(A) FOR ITS CONSIDERATION. THE CIT(A) , IN TURN, FORWARDED THE AFORESAID INFORMATION AND DETAILS TO THE AO VIDE LETTER DATED 10 - 11 - 2016. A DIRECTION WAS GIVEN TO THE AO TO VERIFY THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND SUBMIT A REPORT THEREON TO ENABLE THE CIT(A) TO COMPLETE THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS . HOWEVER, WITHOUT WAITING FOR THE RECEIPT OF REPORT FROM THE AO AND WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY REASON FOR DOING SO, THE CIT(A) PROCEEDED TO PASS ORD E R AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY MERELY REITERATING THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE AO. THE LD.AR THU S SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ITA NO .5 4 2(B)/201 9 3 IS VITIATED FOR NON - CONSIDERATION OF THE REMAND REPORT CALLED FOR BY HIM FROM THE AO RESU LTING IN GRAVE PREJUDICE TO THE ASSESSEE. THE AR ACCORDINGLY URGED FOR SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 6. THE LD. D R ON THE OTHER HAND PACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WITHOUT MAKING ANY FURTHER COMMENTS. 7. IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE N ARRATED ABOVE ON BEHALF OF THE A S SESSEE, WE FIND CONSIDERABLE MERIT IN THE PLEA OF THE AS SESSEE. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED WITHOUT REFERENCE TO ANY REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO . IN THE INSTANT CASE, WHERE THE CIT(A) HAS CONSIDERED IT EXPEDIENT TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE A O SEEKING VERIFICATION OF THE DETAILS A ND DOCUMENTS AND REPORT THEREON, IT WAS INC UMBENT UPON HIM TO ADDRESS THIS ASPECT IN THE APPELLATE ORDER AS TO WHY THE REMAND REPO RT IS NO LONGER CONSIDERED NECESSARY OR HOW THE REMAND REPORT HAS BEEN DULY CONSIDERED. THE CIT(A) HAS DONE NONE OF THIS. THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) THUS, CLEARLY APPEARS TO BE ARBITRARY AND PERFUNCTORY . JUDICIAL PROPRIETY DEMAND ED THAT CIT(A) ADDRESSES TH E ISSUE OF REMAND REPORT SOUGHT AND TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE REPORT SO - CALLED FOR FROM THE AO AND PASS A SPEAKING ORDER THEREAFTER. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS THUS CLEARLY BAD IN LAW AND REQUIRES TO BE SET ASIDE. 8. WE THEREFORE , RESTORE ALL THE ISSUES I N THE CAPTIONED APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR DENOVO CONSIDERATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO .5 4 2(B)/201 9 4 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. SD/ - SD/ - ( N.V.VASUDEVAN ) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: BENGALURU DATED: 06 - 03 - 2020 AM COPY OF ORDER FORW ARDED TO: - 1 . REVENUE 2 . ASSESSEE 3 . CONCERNED CIT 4 . CIT (A) 5 . DR, ITAT, BENGALURU . 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN C OURT ON 06 - 03 - 2020 ITA NO .5 4 2(B)/201 9 5