Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2, Nagpur V. M/s Star Orchem International Pvt Ltd, Nagpur

ITA 89/NAG/2020

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT), Circle-2, Nagpur against M/s. Star Orchem International Pvt. Ltd. for the assessment year 2012-2013. The appeal challenges the order of the CIT(A)-2, Nagpur, which had deleted an addition made on account of a difference in total income shown in the original and revised returns of the assessee. The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the entire amount of Rs.39,32,24,886 despite the assessee conceding receipt of Rs.34.14 crores and only seeking relief for Rs.3.86 crores. Additionally, the Revenue argued that the CIT(A) denied the assessing officer an opportunity to examine additional evidence as per Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order lacked detailed discussion and points of determination as required under section 250(6) of the Act, leading to the decision to remand the case back to the CIT(A).

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136601 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 19-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 25-06-2020
• Other Referred Cases: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 438 ITR 296 (SC), Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC), Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 421 ITR 314
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Revised return

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.89/NAG./2020 Assessment Year 2012-2013 The DCIT, Circle-2, Room No.318, 3 rd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Telangkhedi Road, Civil Lines, Nagpur - 440001. Maharashtra. vs. M/s. Star Orchem International Pvt. Ltd., Bunglow No.1, Amrta Manor, Axis Bank, Ravindranath Tagore Marg, Civil Lines, Nagpur. PIN – 440 001 PAN AAFCS4531C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR. For Assessee : Shri Umang Agrawal Date of Hearing : 20.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 12.10.2023 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This Revenue’s appeal, for the assessment year 2012-2013, arises against the CIT(A)-2, Nagpur’s order in case no. CIT(A)-2/72/2015-16-ITBA No.10551, dated 31.01.2020, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2 ITA.No.89/Nag./2020 2. It is noticed at the outset that the instant appeal of the assessee suffers from 69 day’s delay, is condoned since falling under Covid-2019 pandemic outbreak period between 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 as per hon’ble apex court’s directions in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314, excluding the covid-19 pandemic outbreak period from for all intents and purposes under the limitation law. 3. The Revenue pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal : 1. “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A)-2, Nagpur was justified in deleting the addition made on account of difference in total income shown in Original return of income and revised return of income, despite the fact that the assessee company was following Mercantile System of accounting. 2. Without prejudice the above, the Ld. CIT(A) erred on fact in deleting the entire amount of Rs.39,32,24,886/- in spite of the fact that the assessee conceded that an amount of Rs.34.14 crores had been received by it and it had sought relief only in respect of sale consideration of Rs. 3.86 crores which had not been received by it. 3 ITA.No.89/Nag./2020 3. Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), Nagpur was justified in denying opportunity to the assessing officer to examine the additional evidence in accordance to provision of Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rule, 1962. 4. Any other grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4. We straight-away advert to the learned CIT(A)'s impugned order in the instant appeal and note from A perusal of paragraphs 5.0. to 6.0 of his order that what all he has done is to simply extract the assessee’s written submissions followed by acceptance thereof by way of cryptic findings in para 5.1.3 than having adjudicated the same after framing points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon u/sec.250(6) of the Act. This clinching factual position has gone un-rebutted from the assessee side. 5. Faced with the situation, without commenting upon merits of the issue, we deem it proper to restore the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance back to the CIT(A) at this stage for his afresh appropriate adjudication as per law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly. 4 ITA.No.89/Nag./2020 6. This Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on 12.10.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 12 th October, 2023 VBP/- Copy to 1. The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A)-2, 215, Aayakar Bhavan, Telangkhedi Road, Civil Lines, Nagpur. 4. The Pr.CIT-2, Nagpur. 5. D.R. ITAT, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur. 6. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.