M/s. Cutchi Memon Union, Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Ward- 1, Bangalore

ITA 669/BANG/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0677 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 05-10-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R. PREMI
• Assessee Lawyers: BHAIRAVKUTTAIAH
• Keywords: Depreciation; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 250; 20

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES C BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOU NTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 669 /BANG/20 20 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 16 - 17 ) M/S. CUTCHI MEMON UNION, NO.276, 3 RD FLOOR, K.KAMARAJROAD, BANGALORE - 560 042 .APPELLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) , WARD 1, BANGALORE. RESPONDENT. AS SESSEE BY: SHRI BHAIRAV KUTTAIAH, ADVOCATE. REVENUE BY: SMT. R. PREMI, JCIT (D.R) DATE OF HEARING : 21.12. 20 20. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 .12. 20 20. O R D E R PER SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , A M : TH IS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTE D AGAINST THE ORDER OF C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 14 , BANGALORE DT. 31.08.2020 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016 - 17. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FO LLOWING GROUNDS : 2 ITA NO. 669/BANG/2020 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 14, BENGALURU, PASSED UNDER SECTION 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT') IN SO FAR AS IT IS AGAINST THE APPELLANT IS OPPOSED TO LAW, WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE, NATURAL JUSTICE, PROBABILITIES, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE. 2. THE APPELLANT DE NIES ITSELF TO BE LIABLE TO BE ASSESSED OVER AND ABOVE THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS. NIL ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN LAW IN NOT AFFORDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO T HE APPELLANT AND CONSEQUENTLY, THE IMPUGNED EX PARTE ORDER IS PASSED IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN LAW IN UPHOLDING THE A CTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING A DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION CLAIM AMOUNTING TO R S. 13,95,884/ - WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE DEPRECIATION AMOUNTING TO RS. 13,95,884/ - PERTAINS TO ASSETS WHICH WERE NOT CLAIMED AS APPLICATION OF INCOME AND CONSEQU ENTLY, NO D ISALLOWANCE IS WARRANTED ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 5. THE APPELLANT DENIES ITSELF LIABLE TO BE CHARGED INTEREST UNDER 234 OF THE ACT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND, SUBS TITUTE, CHANGE AND DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 7. FOR THE ABOVE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE ALLOWED AND JUSTICE RENDERED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MADE A PRIMARY ARGUMENT THAT THE EXPARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (APPEALS) IS BAD IN LAW. ACCORDING TO LD. AR, THE NOTICE DT.11.3.2020 BY CIT (APPEALS) WAS NOT AT ALL SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE, THE SAME IS THE POSITION WITH THE NOTICE DT.21.08.2020 FOR MAKING SUBMISSIONS ON 28.08.2020. HE PLEADED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT 3 ITA NO. 669/BANG/2020 (APPEALS) EXPARTE WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING IS BAD IN LAW AND CONSEQUENTLY, PRAYED THAT THE ORDER HAS TO BE QUASHED. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS VERY IN - CO - OPERATIVE AND NOT RESPONDED PROPERLY BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS), AS SUCH THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. AR TO BE DISMISSED. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AS SEEN FROM THE CIT (APPEALS) ORDER IN PARA 4, ONE NOTICE DT.11.3.2020 WAS ALLEGED TO BE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE, NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, A NOTICE DT.21.08.2020 WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE HIS SU BMISSION BY 28.08.2020 THROUGH E - MAILING PORTAL OR E - MAIL. THERE IS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT (APPEALS) DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERIT. IN OUR OPINION, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO GIVE ONE MORE CHANCE TO THE ASSESSEE SO AS TO FACILITATE THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE. SINCE WE HAVE DECIDED ON THE LEGAL ISSUE OF GIVING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, WE REFRAINED FROM GOING TO OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THIS STAGE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/ - SD/ - ( N.V. VASUDEVAN ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21 .12. 20 20 . *REDDY GP 4 ITA NO. 669/BANG/2020 COPY TO 1. THE APPELL ANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT (A) 4. PR. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE