JHARKHAND BHAWAN EVAM ANYA SANIRMAN KARMKAR KALYAN BOARD,RANCHI V. ITO, WARD-1(1), RANCHI

ITA 99/RAN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Jharkhand Bhawan Evam Anya SanirmanKarmkar Kalyan Board, an instrumentality of the Central Government, appealing against the orders of the CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi, for the assessment years 2013-14, 2015-16, and 2018-19. The primary contention was the assessee's status as 'State' under various legal precedents, which would affect their tax liabilities. The Income Tax Officer had conducted exparte assessments due to non-representation by the assessee, leading to these appeals. The Tribunal considered the submissions and decided to restore the matter to the AO for a detailed examination and proper adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 633329 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Other Referred Cases: WATCO vs CIT, CIT vs Maharashtra Labour Welfare Board, State Pollution Control Board vs ITO, Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education vs ITO
• Laws Referred To: Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996, Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act, 1996
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RINKU SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRIM.K.CHOWDHARY

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORES/ AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No Assessment Year Jharkhand Bhawan Evam Anya SanirmanKarmkar Kalyan Board, Joint Labour Building, Behind Ashoka Hotel, Doranda, Ranchi PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench These are appeal ld CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi all 13/10231287, Appeal No.NFAC/2014 18/10245078 respectively. The assessee has also filed stay petitions. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/20 Assessment Years: 2013-14,2015-16 & 2018 S.A. No.10, 11 & 12/Ran/2025 Jharkhand Bhawan Evam Anya SanirmanKarmkar Kalyan Board, Joint Labour Building, Behind Ashoka Hotel, Doranda, Ranchi vs Income Tax Officer, War 1(1), Central Revenue Building, Main Road, Ranchi .AABAJ 41569 K (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri M.K.Chowdhary, Adv Revenue by :Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 13/06/202 Date of Pronouncement :13/06/ O R D E R appeals filed by the assessee against the separate NFAC, Delhi all dated 12.3.2025 in Appeal No. 13/10231287, Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10266681 and Appeal No.NFAC/2017 for the assessment years 2013-14,2015 . The assessee has also filed stay petitions. P a g e 1 | 13 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /RAN/2025 16 & 2018-19 11 & 12/Ran/2025 Income Tax Officer, War- 1(1), Central Revenue Main Road, Ranchi Respondent) M.K.Chowdhary, Adv CIT DR 2025 /2025 separate orders of the in Appeal No.NFAC/2012- 15/10266681 and Appeal No.NFAC/2017- 14,2015-16 & 2018-19, ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 2 | 13 2. Smt. Rinku Singh, Ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue and ShriM.K.Chowdhary,ld AR appeared for the assessee. 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee proposed to file written submission and same are filed, which reads as follows: ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 3 | 13 ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 4 | 13 ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 5 | 13 ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 6 | 13 ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 7 | 13 ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 8 | 13 ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 9 | 13 ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 10 | 13 ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 11 | 13 4. It was the submission that the assessee is an instrumentality of Central Governmentto implement the direction of the execution of building and other construction workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 and building and other construction workers ‘s welfare Cess Act, 1996,. It was the submission that the Board of the assessee consisted ofnominated representativesand State Government officials. It was the submission that in view of the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal Cuttack bench in the case of WATCO vs CIT, 146 taxmann.com 4 (CTC) aa also the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of CIT vs Maharashtra Labour Welfare Board (2-24) 118 ITR (Trib) 494 and the decision of the ITAT Cuttack in the case of State Pollution Control Board vs ITO, 172, taxmann.com 12 (CTC) and in the case of Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education vs ITO, 104 TAXMANN.COM 98 (Mum), the assessee is liable to be treated as “State”. It was the prayer that the issue AO may be directed to treat the assessee as “State”. 5. In reply, ld CIT DR submitted that the assessee has not appeared before the Assessing Officer nor provided any information. It was the submission that on account of non-representation, the assessment has been done exparte. It was the submission that’s the issue may be restored to the file of the AO for readjudication including the issue of “State”. ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 12 | 13 6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that the assessee has not made any representation and provided all the details before the AO. This being so, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after con allowing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The AO shall consider the applicability of the status of “State”. The AO shall also examine whether the assessee falls within the criterion as mentioned in the decisions of the Co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of WATCO, Maharashtra Labour Welfare Board,State Pollution Control Board and Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education ,referred to (supra) by ld AR of the assessee. All issues including the issue of reopening such as legal issue are left open for the assessee to raise before the AO. In these circumstances, with the above directions, the issues are restored to the file of the AO. 7.. In the result, appeals` of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes. 8. The assessee has filed stay petitions being S.A. 11 and 12/RAN/2025. As we have already disposed off the appeals filed by the assessee, the Stay Petitions have become infructuous and same are dismissed as infructuous. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 13/06/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi; Dated 13/06/2025 ITA Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19 P a g e 13 | 13 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Ranchi 1. The Appellant : Jharkhand Bhawan Evam Anya SanirmanKarmkar Kalyan Board, Joint Labour Building, Behind Ashoka Hotel, Doranda, Ranchi 2. The Respondent: Income Tax Officer, War- 1(1), Central Revenue Building, Main Road, Ranchi 3. The CIT(A)-NFAC 4. Pr.CIT,Ranchi 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// "