VARDHAN COLD STORAGE PVT LTD,RANCHI V. ITO WARD W3(1), RANCHI, RANCHI

ITA 157/RAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals by Vardhan Gold Storage Pvt. Ltd. against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) concerning the denial of deductions under section 80-IE of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for various assessment years from 2017-18 to 2021-22. The primary issue was the denial of a deduction claimed in the return due to the non-filing of Form 10CCB within the stipulated time. The Tribunal noted inconsistencies in the application of sections 80-IE and 80-IB in the CIT(A)'s decision and found a violation of the principles of natural justice, leading to the decision to remand the case for a fresh evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 37743 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 01-05-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 250; 143(1); 44AB

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH,RANCHI Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Judicial Member Shri Prabhash Shankar, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 156/RAN/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 I.T.A. No. 157/RAN/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 158/RAN/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 I.T.A. No. 159/RAN/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 & I.T.A. No. 160/RAN/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Vardhan Gold Storage Pvt. Ltd., Ranchi, Harsh Kutir, Nagarmal Modi Seva Sadan Path, Ranchi - 834001 [PAN: AABCV3360J] .....................…...………… Appellant vs. ITO Ward W3(1), Ranchi, Central Revenue Building, Main Road, Ranchi - 834001 .....…................................. Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : V.K. Jalan, AR Department represented by : P.K. Koley, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 16.10.2024 Date of pronouncing the order : 16.10.2024 ORDER Per Bench: These appeals preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Nashik [in short 'the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 14.03.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the \"Act\") for the Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 as per the grounds of appeal on record. I.T.A. Nos. 156-160/RAN/2024 Vardhan Gold Storage Pvt. Ltd. 2 2. At the outset, the parties herein conceded that the facts and circumstances and the issues involved in these appeals are absolutely similar and identical and therefore having heard their submissions these matters are heard and adjudicated vide this consolidated order. 3. We have given considerable thought to the submission of the parties, analysed the facts and circumstances in this case. We notice that the Ld. CIT(A) in his findings have held as under: \"5.1 All the grounds of appeal are related to the singular issue of denial of deduction u/s 80-IE of the Act and consequent demand. So, they are adjudicated together as under 5.2 The A.O. has denied deduction claimed in the Return of Rs. 8,86,300/- u/s 80-IE of the Act. It is observed that the appellant has not filed Form 10CCB on or before one month prior to the due date for furnishing return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act as mandated in terms of Section 80-IE, Rule 21 AE and Section 44AB of the Act. Therefore, the deduction u/s 80-IB is not allowable to the appellant. Its arguments that the Audit report was ready within time but could not be filed because of technical hitch is without merit nor supported by any documentary evidence. So, it holds no water and is not acceptable. Therefore, action of the CPC in denying the deduction u/s 80-IE of the Act is justified. Hence the addition made by the CPC is upheld. The ground raised by the appellant is dismissed. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the appellant is disposed of as Dismissed.\" 4. It was observed by the Bench that sometimes the Ld. CIT(A) has referred to deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80-IE of the Act and sometimes he has written that the deduction as claimed by the assessee is u/s 80-IB of the Act. In order to verify the actual position, we had called for a report from the AO and the said report has been placed on record which is extracted as follows: \"With reference to the above captioned subject, this is to submit that the return of income e-filed by M/s. Vardhan Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. [PAN:AABCV 3360J] for the Assessment Year 2017-18 has been verified and it is found that the assessee claimed deduction u/s. 80-IB of the I.T. Act, 1961, which was disallowed by the CPC at the time of processing of return u/s. 143(1) of the I.T.Act, 1961. Relevant portion of the return of income and Intimation u/s. 143(1) of the 1.T.Act, 1961 are enclosed. I.T.A. Nos. 156-160/RAN/2024 Vardhan Gold Storage Pvt. Ltd. 3 This is for kind information\" 5. That it has been clearly mentioned in the aforestated report that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 80-IB of the Act whereas the Ld. CIT(A) has adjudicated the matter on the basis of section 80-IE of the Act. Therefore, there is gross violation in proper adjudication by the Ld. CIT(A) since appropriate provision has not been appreciated. In such scenario, the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) becomes pervert, unlawful, void-ab-initio. However, the principles of natural justice are equally applicable both to the Department as well as to the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) sometimes have written section 80-IB of the Act and sometimes he has written section 80-IE of the Act, this may be a typographical error also. In any case, the rules of natural justice demands that one final opportunity should be given to the Department to adjudicate the matter on merits applying the correct provisions of law. In view thereof we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in all these cases and remand the matters back to his file for denovo adjudication as per law while complying with principle of natural justice. The assessee is also directed to comply with hearing notices before the said authority. The grounds of appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 16/10/2024. Sd/- Sd/- [Prabhash Shankar] [Partha Sarathi Choudhury] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 16.10.2024. AK, PS (on tour) I.T.A. Nos. 156-160/RAN/2024 Vardhan Gold Storage Pvt. Ltd. 4 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Vardhan Gold Storage Pvt. Ltd, Ranchi 2. ITO Ward W3(1), Ranchi 3. CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. CIT(DR) 6. Guard File //True copy// BY ORDER, (Senior Private Secretary) (On Tour), ITAT, Ranchi "