MAN TRUCK & BUS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE V. DCIT, CIRCLE 7, PUNE

ITA 814/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Man Truck & Bus India Private Limited appealing against the order of the CIT(A), Pune, which was passed ex-parte. The appeal was directed against the assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2018-19. The primary contention of the assessee was that the CIT(A) failed to address the appeal on its merits despite the ex-parte nature of the proceedings. The assessee raised several grounds including issues related to transfer pricing adjustments, disallowances of notional interest and excess provisions, and incorrect computation of total income among others. The ITAT noted the absence of a speaking order from the CIT(A) and the need for a detailed examination of the merits of the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 313035 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT(C) Vs. Prem Kumar Arjundas Luthra (huf), B.Bhattacharyajee & another (118 & ITR 461)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAKASH L PATHADE
• Assessee Lawyers: HARSH R SHAH
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; Reasonable cause; Depreciation; TDS; Notional interest; Unabsorbed depreciation
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"सी\" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"C\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.814/PUN/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Man Truck & Bus India Private Limited, Level 3, Malpani Agile,Pan Card Club Road, Baner, Pune-411045 Maharashtra PAN-AAECM6932E Vs DCIT, Circle 7, Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Harsh R Shah Revenue by : Shri Prakash L Pathade, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 24.04.2025 Date of pronouncement : 02.05.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order u/s 250 of the Act dated 09.01.2025 for Assessment Year 2018-19 framed by Ld. CIT(A), Pune 13 and is arising out of assessment order passed by NFAC, Delhi (AO) u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144C(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 herein after referring as Act, dated 08.11.2021. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CTT(A) has erred in not appreciattig that even while disposing of the appeal ex parte, the Hon'ble CIT(A) was duty bound to dispose of the appeal on merits. Accordingly, the Order passed by the Hon'ble CIT(A) without going 2 ITA No.814/PUN/2025 through the detailed statement of facts, grounds of appeal and the submissions dated 2 ebruary 2012 and 9 January 2025 cannot be sustained. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the cave and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) errad by upholing the order passed by the leamed AO ('assessment order) in relation to transfer pricing adjustment of INR 33,03,75,100 wahout appreciating that the same is not sustainabile owing to the Unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) executed by the Appellant with the CBDT on 21 December 2021 and the modified return of income fled by the Appellant on 31 March 2022. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that no disallowance of INR 17,16,421 was warranted since the said amount was on account of notional interest recorded in the statement of profit and loss due to Ind AS adjustment. 4. On the fects and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CTT(A) erred in not appreciating that no disallowance of INR 1,84,90,300 was warranted since the sald amount was excess prevision that was written back. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the Appellant ought to be granted allowance of brought forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the learned AO has erred in considering the erroneous computation of total income in intimation issued under 143(1) of the Act while passing the final assessment order. 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the Appellant ought to have been granted due credit of TDS, resulting in consequential refund along with interest. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the learned AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act. The above grounds are Independent and without prejudice to one another. The Appellant cravess leave to add, amend, vary, omit or substitute any of 3 ITA No.814/PUN/2025 the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of appeal, so as to enable the Hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to decide this appeal according to law. 3. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the impugned order is ex- parte and Ld. CIT(A) has not given any findings on merits of the case. Therefore prayed for providing one more opportunity for pleading the case before Ld. CIT(A) on various grounds of appeal raised in Form 35 filed before Ld. CIT(A) on 17.12.2021. 4. Per contra Ld. DR was fair enough in not opposing the genuine request made by Ld. counsel for the assessee. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. 6. Impugned order is ex-parte. Assessee did not attend to the first date of hearing fixed on 21.02.2024 and thereafter filed adjournment on dates fixed on 22.07.2024 and 10.12.2024 and on the final date of hearing given on 09.01.2025, in the absence of any representative, Ld. CIT(A) framed the impugned order on the very same date giving reference to various decisions including that of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of B.Bhattacharyajee & another (118 & ITR 461) and concluded the appellant proceedings by confirming the order of the AO without specifically dealing with the various grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT(C) Vs. Prem Kumar Arjundas Luthra (huf) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that Ld. CIT(A)NFAC is obliged to dispose the appeal on merits even in the ex-parte order. Examining the impugned order in light of the above judgement, we find that Ld. CIT(A) failed to deal with merits of the case and did not passed a speaking order. We also note that the assessee 4 ITA No.814/PUN/2025 has also not made proper compliance before Ld. CIT(A) and therefore in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties , we deem it appropriate to remit all the issues raised on merits of the case challenging the additions made by the AO back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication as contemplated in section 250(6) of the Act for which proper opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 02nd day of May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; दििांक / Dated: 02nd May, 2025. Neeta आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"C\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"C\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल / Guard File. आिेशािुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "