M/s Metahelix Life Sciences Limited, Bangalore V. DCIT, Bangalore

ITA 836/BANG/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7241 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 22-08-2017
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A ND SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT A NO . 836 /BANG/201 6 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 2 1 3 M/S. METAHELIX LIFE SCIENCES LTD., (SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO M/S. DHAANYA SEEDS LTD.) PLOT NO. 3, KIDB, 4 TH PHASE, BOMMASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 099. PAN: AAB C D7328L VS. DCIT CIRCLE 1 (1)(1), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT & IT A NO . 958/BANG/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012 13 ACIT CIRCLE 4 (1)(2), BANGALORE. VS. M/S. METAHELIX LIFE SCIENCES LTD., (SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO M/S. DHAANYA SEEDS LTD.) PLOT NO. 3, KIDB, 4TH PHASE, BOMMASANDRA, BANGALORE 560 099. PAN: AABCD7328L APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI TATA KRISHNA, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : MISS NEERA MALHOTRA, CIT ( DR ) DATE OF HEARING : 2 9 . 1 1 .201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30 .1 1 .2017 O R D E R PER BENCH: THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND R EVENUE AND THESE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A) 4, BANGALOR E DATED 24.02.2016 FOR A. Y. 2012 13. ITA NOS. 836 & 958/BANG/2016 PAGE 2 OF 3 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEAR NED AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ONE OF THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THIS THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED IN THE NAME OF NONEXISTENT COMPANY IS VOID AND IT I S AN INCURABLE DEFECT IN THE EYES OF LAW. AT THIS JUNCTURE, THE BENCH WANTED TO KNOW THE FINDING OF CIT (A) ON THIS ISSUE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT (A) H AS DECIDED THIS ISSUE AS PER PARA 9.1 OF HIS ORDER. THE BENCH OBSERVED THAT THIS ORDER OF CIT (A) IN PARA 9.1 OF HIS ORDER IS VERY CRYPTIC BECAUSE FROM THE SAME, IT IS NOT COMING OUT AS TO WHAT ARE THE OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND WHAT IS THE FINDING OF CIT (A) IN RESPECT OF THE OBJECTIONS AND THEREFORE, THE MATTER HAS TO GO BACK TO HIS FILE FOR A FRESH DECISION BY WAY OF A SPEAKING AND REASONED ORDER AND HENCE, THE ISSUE ON MERIT IN BOTH THESE APPEALS NEED NO ADJUDICATION AT THE PRESENT STAGE BECAUSE THE ISSUE ON MERIT HAS TO BE DECIDED AFTER DECISION ON LEGAL ASPECT. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE SET ASIDE TH E ORDER OF CIT (A) AND RESTORE THE ENTIRE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR A FRESH DECI SION . WE DIRECT HIM TO FIRST DECIDE THE LEGAL ASPECT AFRESH BY WAY OF A SPEAKING AND REASONED ORDER. IF THE ASSESSEE SUCCEEDS ON THIS ASPECT, THAN NOTHING IS L EFT TO BE DECIDED AND IF THE ASSESSEE FAILS, THAN THE ISSUE ON MERIT SHOULD BE D ECIDED AFRESH. NEEDLESS TO SAY, HE SHOULD PROVIDE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEIN G HEARD TO BOTH SIDES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS WEL L AS OF THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- (LALIET KUMAR) (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2017. /MS/ ITA NOS. 836 & 958/BANG/2016 PAGE 3 OF 3 COPY TO: 1. APP ELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.