TRAC MEDIA PVT LTD,CHENNAI V. ADDI. CIT - RANGE-27, NEW DELHI

ITA 3214/DEL/2019

AI Insights

Trac Media Pvt. Ltd. filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which had dismissed their earlier appeal concerning the assessment year 2015-16. The primary issues in the appeal included the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer in New Delhi to assess a company based in Chennai, and the disallowance of depreciation and other expenses by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had consistently failed to appear and provide necessary submissions at various stages, including before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). The Tribunal also highlighted that the assessee had previously sought to transfer the case to Chennai, which was rejected. Given these circumstances, the Tribunal decided the case based on the submissions of the Departmental Representative and the records available.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474878 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAHIL KUMAR BANSAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Depreciation
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 3214/Del/2019 Trac Media Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3214/DEL/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) Trac Media Pvt. Ltd. No. 35, NP, 3rd Main road, Kalaimagal Nagar, Ekkattuthangal, Chennai, Tamil Nadu PAN: AADCT4184G Vs. Additional CIT Ragne-27 New Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement 26/03/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-9 [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short] dated 25/01/2019 pertaining to Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Grounds of Appeal are as under:- “The order of the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) is contrary to law, facts of the case and material on record. 1. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) grossly erred in deciding the appeal without giving adequate opportunity to the assesse.The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the assessment order dated 25.12.2017 passed by learned assessing officer is without jurisdiction and void-ab-initio and is liable to be quashed, The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that admittedly that out of four notices referred in the appellate order, only one notice dated 31/08/2018 was sent to the correct address of the assesse and all the other 2 ITA No. 3214/Del/2019 Trac Media Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT notices issued subsequently were sent to erstwhile address of the assesse. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) is not justified in not adjudicating on the grievance of the assesse with regard to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer at New Delhi for making an assessment on the assesse without appreciating that the basic objection of the assesse was with regard to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to make an assessment on the assesse. 3. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer without appreciating that the Assessing Officer was not possessed of sufficient material to make disallowance of 50% of expenses claimed by the assesse. 4. For these grounds and such other grounds as may be adduced either before or during the course of appeal proceedings, the appellate prays that the Appellate Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the orders of the authorities below holding them to be untenable and illegal with a direction to the Assessing Officer to make de novo assessment as per law after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the appellant and render justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed against the Assessee u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) by disallowing the depreciation of Rs. 9,16,222/- attributable to the fixed assets and also by making disallowance of 15% of other expenses of Rs. 5,05,69,784/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 25/12/2017, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 25/01/2019, dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 25/01/2019, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 3 ITA No. 3214/Del/2019 Trac Media Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT 4. None appeared for the Assessee when the Appeal is called. The order sheet reveals that in most of the occasions no one appeared on behalf of the Assessee and whenever the representative of the Assessee appeared only sought for adjournment and never argued the Appeal. On the last occasion i.e. 10/03/2025,once again an application for adjournment has been moved by the Assessee and the Appeal has been adjourned to 12/03/2025 as last chance to the Assessee. Even on this day i.e. 12/03/2025,neither the Assessee nor the representative of the Assessee appeared before us. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to decide the appeal on hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative and perusing the material available on record. 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that the Assessee has not appeared before the A.O. andalso before the Ld. CIT(A) and made no submissions on the merits. It was the only contention of the Assessee before the A.O. that the A.O. at Delhi has no jurisdiction and sought for transferring the case to Chennai in view of ROCchangeand made no submission on merits. The Ld. Departmental Representative further submitted that on an earlier occasion, even before the Tribunal,the Assessee sought for transferring the present Appeal to Chennai Tribunal which has been rejected by the Hon’ble President of 4 ITA No. 3214/Del/2019 Trac Media Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT the Tribunal vide order dated 19/12/2023. The Ld. Departmental Representative further relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 6. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. The Assessee filed return of income declaring the loss of Rs. 21,37,59,320/- for Assessment Year 2015-16 and the case of the Assessee was selected or limited scrutiny in CASS. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessee requested to transfer the case to Chennai in view of ROC charge. However, the same has been rejected and the A.O. and gave opportunity to the Assessee to file the details. Even after availing several opportunities the Assessee has not field many details or submissions on the merits except reiteratingfor transfer of the case. Considering the same, the assessment order came to be passed u/s 144 of the Act by assessing the loss of the Assessee at Rs. 16,22,73,334/- as against the return loss of Rs. 21,37,59,340/-. Though the Assessee filed Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), even after service of several notices the Assessee has not put forth any argument, filed any submission or any document to support the claim of the Assessee.Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissedthe Appeal of the Assessee. Even before the Tribunal, the Assessee has also sought for transfer of the present Appeal to Chennai Bench. The same has been 5 ITA No. 3214/Del/2019 Trac Media Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT placed before the Hon’ble President of the Tribunal and the Hon’ble President vide order dated 19/12/2023,rejected the application for transfer of the Appeal and directed the registry to list the Appeal for hearing before the regular Bench. Before us, as stated above, neither the Assessee nor the representative of the Assessee appeared and made any submissions on merits. It is found from the record that,right from the assessment proceedings till the Tribunal the Assessee failed to make submissions on merit except seeking for transfer of the assessment proceedings.In our considered opinion, the A.O. has rightly made the additions which has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). In the absence of any contrary material available on record or brought to our notice, we find no reason to interfere with order of the Ld. CIT(A), accordingly, the Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th March, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 26.03.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S*/ Kavita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "