ACP INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)

BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. Dy.Commissioner of M/s.ACP Industries Income Tax, 193/Hyd/2018 Limited, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AABCA4804E] 2011-12 Dy.Commissioner of M/s.ACP Industries 267/Hyd/2018 Income Tax, Limited, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AABCA4804E]

For Assessee : Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, AR For Revenue : Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 05-10-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 27-10-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : These Revenue’s and assessee’s cross appeals for AY.2011-12 arise against the CIT(A)-1, Hyderabad’s order(s) dated 20-10-2017 in appeal Nos.0340 / CIT(A)-1 / Hyd / 2014-15 / 2017-18, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]; respectively. Heard both the parties. Case files perused.

:- 2 -: ITA Nos. 193 & 267/Hyd/2018

loans of Rs.6,94,01,241/-; appeal-wise respectively. It next transpires during the course of hearing that the Assessing Officer had passed his assessment order on 28-03-2014 ex-parte which prima facie indicates that the assessee could not produce all the relevant supportive material regarding all the foregoing issues. It appears to have filed its additional evidence before the CIT(A) only which stands partly accepted without granting any opportunity to the Assessing Officer to rebut the contents thereof which leaves both the parties; and more particularly the department aggrieved, in foregoing terms. Faced with this situation, and more so when the assessee had filed its additional documents before the CIT(A) which were never forwarded to the Assessing Officer for factual verification under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, we are of the opinion that larger interest of justice would be met in case the assessing authority herein adjudicates all these issues afresh within three effective opportunities of hearing. We order accordingly. The Revenue’s and assessee’s respective substantive grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. 3. These Revenue’s and assessee’s cross appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 27th October, 2021 Sd/- Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S.GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 27-10-2021 TNMM

:- 3 -: ITA Nos. 193 & 267/Hyd/2018

Copy to : 1.The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. 2.M/s.ACP Industries Limited, C/o.Ch.Parthasarathy & Co., 1-1-298/2/B/3, 1st Floor, Sowbhagya Avenue, St.No.1, Ashoknagar, Hyderabad. 3.The CIT(Appeals)-1, Hyderabad. 4.The Pr.CIT-1, Hyderabad. 5.D.R. ITAT, Hyderabad. 6.Guard File.