Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar
Per Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 04.01.2023 passed for A.Y. 2019-20. 2. In response to the notice of hearing, an adjournment application was sent by one Shri Palash Roy, HDE & Manager. However, after going through the record, we do not deem it necessary to adjourn the hearing. Hence his application is rejected and we proceed to decide the appeal on merit.
With the assistance of ld. D.R., we have gone through the record carefully. The assessee has raised seven grounds of appeal
. However, we find that the ld. 1st Appellate Authority has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution without adjudicating the issues on merit. The grounds of the assessee read as under:- “Ground-1. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in Law in Identifying the subject matter of the case. In Para - I of the order issued under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre held as Follows :- “ The appeal was instituted on 18/11/2018 against the order under section 271B of the Income Tax Act 1961 for Assessment Year 2015-16.” A.Y. 2019-2020 Debipur Union Cooperative Agricultural Credit Society Limited Although the subject matter of the appeal is on section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act 1961. Hence the order is wrong, erroneous, arbitrary, excessive, unlawful and deserve to be set-aside/cancelled/annulled. Ground-
2. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act 1961 invoked while processing the return under section 143(1) or the Income Tax Act 1961 without granting opportunity of hearing to assessee either in assessment stage or first appeal there by rendering the orders of authorities below invalid, ab-initio void, illegal and against Ground- 3 For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the eligibility of deduction under section 80P on enhanced Gross total income not considered in the processing of the return under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961. Ground- 4 For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, provision of Income Tax Act followed partially while processing the return under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961. Rs. 1,96,000.00 added with the Profits and Gains of Business by invoking section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act 1961 and the profits and gains increased by Rs. 1,96,000.00, but the enhanced amount of Rs. 1,96,000.00 not considered for allowing deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act 1961. Ground- 5 For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre ignored the Covid Pandemic situation and the outbreak of world wide lock down and prolonged delay in working of the new Income Tax portal of the department and considered your appellant as willful defaulter of not responding the notices issued. Ground- 6 For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dismissed the appeal assuming that your appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal without considering the facts and merit of the appeal. Ground-
7. For that the assessee craves leave to alter, add, amend, moderate, substitute or delete any one or more of the ground or grounds of appeal at anytime before or in course of hearing”. 3 A.Y. 2019-2020 Debipur Union Cooperative Agricultural Credit Society Limited
4. In the first-fold of contention, it has been pleaded by the assessee that the ld. 1st Appellate Authority has wrongly mentioned in the impugned order that this appeal is being filed against the order under section 271B of the Income Tax Act, whereas the appeal was filed against an order passed under section 143(1) vide which income of the assessee was processed by the ld. Assessing Officer. One of the grievances of the assessee is that while processing the return under section 143(1), the ld. Assessing Officer had made a disallowance of Rs.1,96,000/- with the aid of section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act and this amount was not considered by the ld. Assessing Officer for its inclusion in the eligible profit to claim deduction under section 80P.
On due consideration of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the view that sub-section (6) of section 250 contemplates that ld. CIT(Appeals) would state the points in dispute and thereafter record reasons in support of her conclusion on those points. A perusal of the impugned order would reveal that this mandatory procedure has not been followed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). Hence, the impugned order is not sustainable, it is set aside. The issues agitated by the assessee in the grounds of appeal
extracted supra are remitted back to the ld. CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication on merit. The ld. Assessing Office having jurisdiction over the assessee would ensure the transmission of this record to the competent authority A.Y. 2019-2020 Debipur Union Cooperative Agricultural Credit Society Limited for allocation of this appeal to CIT(Appeals) through alleged National Faceless Disposal of the appeals.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on April 27, 2023.