M/s U.P State Agro Industrial Corporation Limited, Lucknow V. DY. Commissioner of Income Tax-Vi, Lucknow

ITA 688/LKW/2019

AI Insights

The case involves the U.P. State Agro Industrial Corporation Ltd., which filed an appeal against the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-VI, Lucknow, concerning the assessment year 2014-15. The appeal was against the addition of Rs. 21,97,073 to the corporation's income, which was upheld by the CIT(A)-II, Lucknow. The corporation argued that the revised computation of income was not admitted due to the expiry of time under section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act, and that they were prevented by reasonable cause from submitting the statutory audited balance sheet and profit and loss account at the time of filing the return. However, the appeal was dismissed not on the merits of these arguments but due to procedural defects in the filing of the appeal itself.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 113270 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 09-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 25-11-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHEELA CHOPRA
• Keywords: Revised return
• Section: 139(5)

Judgement Text

I.T.A. No.688/Lkw/2019 Assessment year:2014-15 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘B’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.688/Lkw/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 U.P. State Agro Industrial Corpn. Ltd., 22, Vidhan Sabha Marg, Lucknow. PAN:AAACU2653G Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Range-VI, Lucknow. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M. A. The appeal in I.T.A. No.688/Lkw/2019 for assessment year 2014- 15 has been filed by the assessee, against the impugned appellate order dated 23/10/2019. The grounds of appeal are as under: “1. The Ld. C.I.T.(A)-II, Lucknow erred on facts and in law by upholding addition of Rs.21,97,073/- (Rs.7,22,01,073 (minus)- Rs.7,00,04,000) by not admitting the Revised Appellant by None Respondent by Smt. Sheela Chopra, CIT (D.R.) Date of hearing 10/05/2023 Date of pronouncement 11/05/2023 I.T.A. No.688/Lkw/2019 Assessment year:2014-15 2 Computation Chart submitted before Ld. A.O. during course of assessment proceeding, showing income at Rs.7,22,01,073/- instead of income shown in the return filed at Rs.7,00,03,995/- without appreciating that Revised Return could not be filed due to expiry of time u/s 139(5) of I. T. Act. 2. The Ld. C.I.T.(A)-II, did not appreciate that assessee corporation was prevented by a reasonable cause for not submitting the statutory audited balance sheet and profit and loss account at the time of filing of return. 3. The addition made is highly excessive, contrary to the facts, law and principle of natural justice and without providing sufficient time and opportunity to have its say on the reasons relied upon by him.” (B) In the case of aforesaid appeal vide I.T.A. No.688/Lkw/2019, defect memo dated 25/05/2022 was issued by registry, intimating the following defects: “1. Appeal fee not filed in minor head 300” (B.2.1) Despite substantial lapse of time since issue of defect memo by the registry, and inspite of several reminders, the appellant assessee in the aforesaid appeal has not removed the defect pointed out through the aforesaid defect memo. Therefore, this appeal is hereby dismissed on account of failure on the part of assessees to remove the defect intimated to the appellant in this appeal. However, the assessee will be at liberty to approach the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT” for short) for restoration of the appeal after the defect is removed by the appellant assessee. If such request is received in ITAT from the I.T.A. No.688/Lkw/2019 Assessment year:2014-15 3 assessee, the same will be considered by ITAT in accordance with law having regard to relevant facts and circumstances. (C). In the result, the appeal is dismissed on account of failure on the part of the appellant to remove the defect. (Order pronounced in the open court on 11/05/2023) Sd/. Sd/. (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated:11/05/2023 *Singh Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., Assistant Registrar