LEMMINKAINEN CONSTRUCTION (I) P LTD, CHENNAI V. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-4(1), CHENNAI

ITA 633/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0725 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 15-06-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ ᭠यायपीठ, चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ᮰ी महावीर ᳲसह, उपा᭟यᭃ एवं ᮰ी मनोज कुमार अᮕवाल, लेखा सद᭭य के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:633/CHNY/2020 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2010 - 2011 Lemminkainen Construction (India) Pvt. Ltd., G2, Ground Floor, Sharanam Apartments, Plot 3, 4 th Cross Street, Govindasamy, 10/11, Dr. Radhakrishna Salai, Chennai – 600 091. PAN : AABCL 2126J Vs. The ACIT, Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai – 34. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : None ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT स ु नवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 04.07.2022 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 04.07.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Chennai in I.T.A. No.109/CIT(A)-8/2018-19 dated 25.02.2020. The assessment was framed by the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai for the Assessment Year 2010-11 u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 - 2 - I.T.A. No. 633/Chny/2020 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter ‘the Act’) vide order dated 28.12.2018. 2. Despite service of notice on many occasions, none was present from assessee’s side and even the notices could not be served on the given address and all these RPAD notices came with the remark “No such company at address”. Even, with us no new address is available. Hence, we are constrained to decide the appeal ex-parte qua, assessee. 3. At the outset, it is noticed that the grounds raised by assessee i.e., Ground Nos.2 & 3 are that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order and the same is not a speaking order. The relevant Ground Nos.2 & 3 reads as under:- 2. That the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming additions of INR 2,36,66,664 made by Ld. AO to returned income of the Appellant by relying solely on the Ld. AO's order and without considering the facts and circumstances of the case is bad in law as it is not a speaking order and is therefore against principles of natural justice. 3. That the order of Ld. CIT(A) is impugned and bad in law as adequate opportunity of being heard was not provided to the Appellant. The mandatory notice fixing the date and place of hearing under the provisions of section 250(1) of the Act was not duly served on the Appellant at either the email address specified in Form No. 35 [i.e. [e-mail] ] or at the email address provided by the Appellant on the income tax e-filing portal [i.e. [e-mail] ]. Therefore, the order of Ld.CIT(A) is against principles of natural justice. - 3 - I.T.A. No. 633/Chny/2020 4. We have gone through the order of CIT(A) and the issue is regarding provision for warranty debited by assessee amounting to Rs.2,36,66,664/-. We noted that CIT(A) has not at all adjudicated the issue, how the provision for warranty is created and the terms and condition of warranty. The CIT(A) just passed a non-speaking order as grounds raised by assessee. When confronted, the ld. Senior DR also, could not controvert the above fact situation. As the order of CIT(A) is non-speaking and also ex-parte, as the CIT(A) passed the order without serving notice on the assessee, we set aside the order of CIT(A) and remand the matter back to her file for fresh adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 4 th July, 2022 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनोज कुमार अᮕवाल) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखा सद᭭य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (महावीर ᳲसह ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा᭟यᭃ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 4 th July, 2022 RSR आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुᲦ (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयुᲦ /CIT 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध/DR 6. गाडᭅ फाईल/GF.