M/S. CHIRAG CASHEW PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR V. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

ITA 323/JODH/2023

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by M/s Chirag Cashew Pvt. Ltd. against the order of the CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which upheld a penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The penalty was related to disallowances made during the assessment year 2015-16, where certain depreciation and expenses claimed by the assessee were disallowed. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte, leading to the current appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately addressed several grounds raised by the assessee and noted the absence of response from the assessee to the notices sent through the ITBA portal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474878 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 26-09-2024
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 25-08-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KARNI DAN
• Assessee Lawyers: RAKSHA BIRLA
• Keywords: Depreciation; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 271(1)(c); 11

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 323/JODH/2023 M/s Chirag Cahsew Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH: ‘SMC’ JODHPUR BEFORE SH. PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 323/JODH/2023 (A.Y 2015-16) M/s Chirag Cashew Private Limited 1179, Sector 11 Hiran Magari, Udaipur- 313001, Rajasthan PAN No. AABCL0338G (APPELLANT) Vs. ACIT Circle 1 Udaipur (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM This appeal is filed by the assessee for the Assessment Year 2015-16 against the order of the CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’ for short), dated 25/04/2023. Assessee by : Smt. Raksha Birla, CA Department by: Sh. Karni Dan, Addl. CIT(Sr. DR) Date of Hearing 26.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement 22.10.2024 2 ITA No. 323/JODH/2023 M/s Chirag Cahsew Pvt. Ltd. 2. The grounds of Appeal are as under:- “ 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in upholding the validity of order passed by the Ld. A.O. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the penalty imposed in upholding the penalty imposed by the Ld. A.O. u/s 271(1)(c) particularly when the show cause notice without specifying the nature of default. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in sustaining penalty of Rs. 10,10,000/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have consider the explanation of the assessee in judicious manner while deciding the appeal. 5. That the petitioner may kindly be permitted to raise any additional or alternative grounds at or before the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 13/11/2017 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) by disallowing Rs. 3,49,507/- which was claimed as depreciation by the assessee and also disallowed Rs. 2,50,000/- which was claimed as expensed by the assessee. The penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act has been initiated against the 3 ITA No. 323/JODH/2023 M/s Chirag Cahsew Pvt. Ltd. assessee and the penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) read with Section 275(1A) of the Act came to be passed on 02/05/2018. 4. As against the penalty order dated 02/05/2018, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 25/04/2023, dismissed the Appeal filed by the assessee ex- pate. Aggrieved by the order dated 25/04/2023, the assessee preferred the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order impugned was passed in violation of principals of natural justice, therefore, sought for allowing the Appeal and restore the same to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 6. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the notices were sent to the assessee through ITBA Portal but the assessee has not responded to any of the notices, therefore, the assessee cannot find fault with the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The assessee has instituted the appeal before 4 ITA No. 323/JODH/2023 M/s Chirag Cahsew Pvt. Ltd. the Ld. CIT(A) on 09/06/2018, it is seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), four notices were issued to the assessee through ITBA but the assessee has not responded to any of the notices, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to confirm the order of penalty. It can be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has raised several grounds which were not decided by the Ld. CIT(A) while dismissing the Appeal. Considering the above facts and circumstances we deem it fit to remand the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de- novo adjudication of the Appeal with a direction to decide the Appeal on its merit after hearing the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A). Ordered accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd October, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- ( PRASHANT MAHARISHI ) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 22/10/2024 R.N, Sr. PS* 5 ITA No. 323/JODH/2023 M/s Chirag Cahsew Pvt. Ltd. Copy forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT , JODHPUR "