ARAVINDA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-4(3), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 30/KOL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 January 2023AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was flawed as it did not address the correct issue and was passed ex-parte. Therefore, the order was set aside and the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed late, but the delay was condoned as the CIT(A)'s order was not served. The assessee argued that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and dealt with an irrelevant issue, failing to address the actual disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and failed to adjudicate the correct issue raised in the appeal, specifically the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri B.K. Drolia, C.A
Hearing: 30/11/2022Pronounced: 02/01/2023

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 23, Kolkata (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”) dated 05/12/2016, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act’), for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Registry has pointed out that the appeal is time barred. The assessee has filed an affidavit along with a petition for condonation of delay duly explaining the reasons for delay thereby. The ld. Counsel for the assessee vide the petition has submitted that the order of the ld. CIT(A) was not served upon the assessee as the same was returned back unserved. In view of this, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted.

3.

The only issue raised in this appeal is relating to disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. However, at the outset the ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the order of the ld. CIT(A) to submit that the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order. That, even the ld. CIT(A) has discussed and deliberated on the issue of share application Assessment Year: 2012-13 Aravinda Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 2 which in fact, was not the issue involved in the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). the ld. CIT(A) has not given any finding on the issue involved in the appeal i.e., regarding the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act.

4.

In view of this, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is hereby set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding the issues afresh on merits in accordance with law. Needless to say that CIT(A) will give adequate opportunity to the assessee to present its case.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 2nd January, 2023 at Kolkata. (Manish Borad) Judicial Member Kolkata, Dated 02/01/2023 *SC SrPs

आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

2.

""यथ" / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु" अपील / The CIT(A)- ( ) 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध अिधकरण अपीलीय आयकर कोलकाता/DR,ITAT, Kolkata, , , 6. गाड" फाईल /Guard file.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →