KUBOTA AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI V. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(2), CHENNAI

MA 15/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Kubota Agricultural Machinery India Private Limited appealing against the orders of the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax concerning the assessment years 2014-15 and 2013-14. The primary contention was the non-consideration of the TPO's giving effect order dated 30.01.2024 for AY 2011-12 by the Tribunal, which the assessee argued was a mistake apparent on record. The Tribunal had initially remanded the matter to the TPO for fresh consideration due to the filing of additional evidence, which was not considered in the earlier proceedings. The assessee's advocate argued that the Tribunal incorrectly recorded the facts and that the matter should not have been remanded again, as the TPO had already passed the necessary orders for AY 2011-12. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments and the need for natural justice, decided to recall the earlier order and set the matter for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711230 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KEERTHI NARAYANAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S.P.CHIDAMBARAM
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एसएस िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जगदीश, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ । Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Jagadish, Accountant Member M.A. Nos. 15 and 16/Chny/2025 [In I.T.(TP)A. No.62/Chny/2018 and I.T.A. No. 3089/Chny/2017] िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Years: 2014-15 and 2013-14 M/s. Kubota Agricultural Machinery India Private Limited, No. 15, Medavakkam Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai 600 119. [PAN: AADCK5472E] Vs. The Asstt./Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 4(2), Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Keerthi Narayanan, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 25.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: By these Miscellaneous Applications, the assessee seeks to recall the common order dated 07.08.2024 in IT(TP)A No. 62/Chny/2018 and ITA No. 3089/Chny/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15 and 2013-14 respectively. 2. The ld. AR Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate submits that non- consideration of TPO’s giving effect order dated 30.01.2024 for Printed from counselvise.com M.A. Nos.15 & 16/Chny/25 2 AY 2011-12 by the Tribunal tantamount to mistake apparent on record. Further, he submits that there is no necessity to remand the present appeals to the file of the TPO for giving a finding on the same issue, as such, the order of the Tribunal in remanding the matter once again resultant apparent mistake on record. He argued vehemently that the Tribunal ought not to have remanded the matter for fresh adjudication when the TPO has already passed giving effect order dated 30.01.2024 for AY 2011-12. He argued that this Tribunal also recorded the facts of the case incorrectly in the impugned order and argued vehemently that the impugned order may be recalled/rectified/revised. 3. The ld. DR Shri Keerthi Narayanan, JCIT opposed the submissions of the ld. AR and contents made in the MAs. He submits that the Tribunal passed order rightly remanding the matter to the TPO for verification as there is no occasion to the Tribunal for examination of the facts relating to the issue in giving relief to the assessee by following order of the TPO for AY 2011-12. 4. Upon hearing both the parties and on perusal of the records, we note that the Tribunal remanded the matter to the file of TPO for fresh consideration in view of filing of additional evidence in the form of Printed from counselvise.com M.A. Nos.15 & 16/Chny/25 3 paper book, which were admittedly stated to have not been filed before the TPO/DRP. The Tribunal also recorded that the ld. AR prayed to adopt same finding of the ITAT in assessee’s own case for AY 2011-12 in remanding the matter to the file of the TPO for fresh consideration in terms of additional evidence. The ld. AR vehemently disputed the said statement, which was not at all made during the course of hearing on 20.05.2024. In view of the above arguments of the ld. AR and the DR, in the interest of natural justice, we deem it proper to recall the common order dated 07.08.2024 passed by this Tribunal. Thus, the order dated 07.08.2024 in IT(TP)A No. 62/Chny/2018 and ITA No. 3089/Chny/2017 for AYs 2014-15 and 2013-14 respectively is recalled and taken on file. The Registry is directed to fix both the appeals for hearing before the regular bench. 4. In the result, both the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced on 23rd July, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (JAGADISH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 23.07.2025 Printed from counselvise.com M.A. Nos.15 & 16/Chny/25 4 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "