M/s N1 Media Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh V. ITO, W-4(3), Chandigarh

ITA 87/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0651 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-06-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DAYA INDER SINGH SIDHU CIT
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIRUDH ABHYANKAR
• Keywords: Depreciation; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 43B; 154

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH B, CHANDIGARH (VIRTUAL COURT) .., ! '# #$ %, & '( BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP & SHRI , SANJAY GARG, J M ITA NO. 87/CHD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 M/S N1 MEDIA CONSULTANCY PVT. LTD. # 619, SECTOR 33-B CHANDIGARH ITO, W - 4(3) SECTOR-17 CHANDIGARH PAN NO: AAECA8748C APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : SH. ANIRUDH ABHYANKAR, CA #!' REVENUE BY : SH. DAYA INDER SINGH SIDHU, ADDL. C IT $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 09/06/2020 '()*! & DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09/06/2020 ')/ ORDER PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DT . 29/11/2018 OF THE LD. CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH . 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAS BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEAL: 1. IN THIS REGARD WE BRING TO YOUR NOTICE THAT POST AS SESSMENT WE FILED A LETTER U/S 154 INTIMATING THE A.O THAT HE HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE INVOICES OF FIXED ASSETS PURCHASED. DEPRECIATION DISALLOWANCE WAS ON ACCOUNT OF THAT ONLY. WE BRING TO YOUR NOTICE THAT EVEN AFTER DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION ASSESSED INCOME IS STILL NIL. DEPRECIA TION WAS WRONGLY DISALLOWED WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ACTUAL INVOICES. DUE TO DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATIO N LOSSES WERE REDUCED AND PENALTY WAS CHARGED ON THAT BASIS. GROSS INCOME EVEN AFTER DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATIO N WAS NIL DUE TO BROUGHT FORWARD OF LOSSES HENCE PENALTY IS NOT APPLICABLE ALSO DEPRECIATION D ISALLOWANCE IS WRONGLY DONE AS MENTIONED EARLIER. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ALTHOUGH THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE EXPARTE ORDER WI THOUT PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE HOW EVER THE A.O. HAS PASSED THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 196 1 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS ACT), DT. 10/02/2020 AND HAD DELETED THE ADDITION O F RS. 37,23,613/- MADE IN THE 2 ASSESSMENT ORDER ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS CLAIM OF DEPRECI ATION (COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS FURNISHED WHICH IS PLACED ON RECORD). THEREFORE, THER E IS NO NEED TO ADJUDICATE THE SAID ISSUE, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY GOT THE REL IEF FROM THE DEPARTMENT. 4. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ANOTHER DISALLOWAN CE MADE UNDER SECTION 43B OF THE ACT BY THE A.O. WAS ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS INTEREST AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,82,817/- WHICH WAS PAID BEFORE FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME AND TH E FACT RELATING TO THIS ISSUE MAY BE VERIFIED BY THE A.O. 5. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THE LD. SR. DR SUPPORTED T HE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 6. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIE S AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO REMAND THIS LI MITED ISSUE RELATING TO THE ADDITION AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,82,817/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS CLAIM OF INTEREST PAID WHICH THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE C LAIMED THAT THE SAID AMOUNT WAS PAID BEFORE FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME. THEREFORE, THE A.O. IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFTER VERIFICATION. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 09/06/2020 ) SD/- SD/- #$ % .., (SANJAY GARG ) ( N.K. SAI NI) & '(/ JUDICIAL MEMBER ! / VICE PRESIDENT AG DATE: 09/06/2020 (+! ,-.- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 01 THE CIT(A) 5. -2 45&456789 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 8:% GUARD FILE