MADRAS ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-4(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 962/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 November 2023AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It also set aside the order of the first appellate authority and restored the appeal for de novo adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee sought condonation of a significant delay in filing the appeal, citing non-receipt of the impugned order. The assessee also argued that the first appellate authority erroneously dismissed the appeal based on opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for a different assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal was rightly dismissed by the first appellate authority due to a misunderstanding of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme applicability. Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR

सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 28-11-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28-11-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

At the time of hearing of captioned appeal, Ld. AR sought condonation of delay of 470 days. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee was not served with impugned order either electronically or through registered post. An affidavit to that effect has been filed by Managing Director of assessee entity. The Ld. Sr. DR opposed condonation of delay.

2.

After going through the contents of the affidavit and keeping in mind principle of natural justice, the bench deems it fit to condone the delay and accordingly, the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.

3.

The Ld. AR, at the outset, submitted that the appeal has erroneously been dismissed by first appellate authority on the ground that the assessee opted for settlement under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The Ld. AR submitted that an assessment was framed u/s 143(3) which was settled under the scheme. However the case was reopened and more additions were made by Ld. AO in an assessment framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 vide order dated 31.12.2019 which was challenged before first appellate authority. It was also submitted that the assessee did not opt for the scheme for this assessment. The Ld. Sr. DR could not controvert the same. 4. Concurring with the submissions of Ld. AR, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de- novo adjudication on merits after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case. 5. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 28th November, 2023.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →