Tenneco Automotive India Private Limited, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 710/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 71021714 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-04-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N RENGARAJCIT
• Assessee Lawyers: A S SRIRAMAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI ... , . , , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.704 /MDS./2015 ( ! '! / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2007-08) M/S.VAYU SHAKTHI SUPPLIERS PRIVATE LTD.,D-1,SHRISTI CRESENDOZA, 24,DESIKA ROAD, MYLAPORE, CHENNAI 600 004. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE III(4), CHENNAI 600 034. PAN AABCV 2596 C ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) #$ % & / APPELLANT BY : MR.A.S.SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATE '(#$ % & / RESPONDENT BY : MR.N.RENGARAJ,CIT, D.R ) * % +, / DATE OF HEARING : 17.06.2015 -' % +, /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.06.2015 / O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, AGGRIEVED B Y THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-II, CHENN AI DATED ITA NO.704 /MDS/2015 2 05.03.2015 IN ITA NO.228/CIT(A)-II/2013-14PASSED UN DER SEC.143(3) READ WITH SECTION 250 OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SIX ELABORATE GROUNDS I N ITS APPEAL; HOWEVER THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) WHO HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL INLIMINI WITHOUT ADJUDICATING THE ISSUES ON MERITS. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED BY THE LD. CIT (A) TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE HIM AND THE ORDER WAS PAS SED EXPARTE INLIMINI WITHOUT DECIDING THE ISSUE ON MERITS. IT WAS THERE FORE PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A); THEREBY TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSE SSEE OF BEING HEARD. LD. D.R STOUTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS O F THE LD. A.R AND ARGUED BY STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE OR ITS AUTHORIZ ED REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHEN THE CASE CAME UP FOR HEARING BEFORE HIM, FURTHER NO WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OR LETTER SEEKING ADJOURNMENT WAS SUBMITTED. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT (A) WAS FORCED TO ITA NO.704 /MDS/2015 3 PASS EXPARTE ORDER. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT N O FURTHER OPPORTUNITY MAY BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PURSUE THE APPEAL AND ONLY MAK ING A PLEA TO PROLONG THE LITIGATION. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY PE RUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS RECORDED IN HIS ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE OR HIS AUTHORISED REPRESENT ATIVE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE HIM WHEN THE CASE WAS POSTED FOR HEAR ING, HOWEVER HE HAS NOT MENTIONED AS TO HOW MANY OPPORTUNITIES W AS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR REPRESENTING THE CASE BEFORE HIM. NO DOUBT THE ASSESSEE OUGHT TO HAVE AT LEAST FILED AN ADJOURNMEN T PETITION IF THEY COULD NOT ATTEND TO THE PROCEEDINGS ON THE STIPULAT ED DATE OF HEARING, HOWEVER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE ARE OF THE CO NSIDERED VIEW THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE ASSES SEE TO REPRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). ACCORDINGLY WE HE REBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT (A) FOR DENOVO C ONSIDERATION AND ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT ITS CASE BEFO RE THE REVENUE ITA NO.704 /MDS/2015 4 PROMPTLY WITHOUT SEEKING UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS I N ORDER TO EXPEDITE THE ORDER OF THE REVENUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICTED HEREIN ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 17 TH JUNE, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( N.R.S.GANESAN ) ( . '#$ %' ) (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 17 TH JUNE, 2015. K S SUNDARAM. % '+./ 0 /'+ /COPY TO: 1. #$ /APPELLANT 2. '(#$ /RESPONDENT 3. ) 1+ () /CIT(A) 4. ) 1+ /CIT 5. /4 '+5 /DR 6. 6! 7* /GF