SHRI SALEM RANGASAMY KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 570/CHNY/2022Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 January 2023AY 2020-20213 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable as the assessee was not aggrieved by the CIT(A)'s order, which had already allowed the assessee's appeal in full. The new issue raised was not considered by the lower appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order of the CIT(A) which had allowed the assessee's appeal regarding disallowance of belated EPF payment. The assessee then raised a new issue before the ITAT concerning LTCG exemption, which was not before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Maintainability of appeal when the assessee is not aggrieved by the lower appellate authority's order. Whether new issues can be raised before the Tribunal if not considered by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 19.01.2023Pronounced: 19.01.2023

O R D E R

PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2019-20/10074099 dated 12.05.2022. The return of income was processed and intimation u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) was 2 issued by the Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru for the assessment year 2020-21 vide order dated 02.12.2021.

2.

At the outset, it is noticed from the order passed by CIT(A) dated 12.05.2022 for the assessment year 2020-21 that the only issue raised before CIT(A) is as regards to the disallowance of belated payment of EPF amounting to Rs.34,098/-. The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee allowed appeal of assessee.

3.

Now, when it was pointed out to ld.counsel for the assessee what is the grievance of assessee, he drew our attention to additional ground raised before us that the CIT(A) erred in not allowing exemption for Long Term Capital Gains on sale of land acquired by the Government under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (Central Act 30 of 2013) [“RFCTLARR” Act]. When a specific query was put to ld.counsel what was the issue before CIT(A), he could not controvert that only issue raised before CIT(A) was the disallowance of EPF payment paid belatedly and disallowance under challenge was only Rs.34,098/-, which the CIT(A) allowed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →