Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: MANISH AGARWAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Regional Regional Plant Plant Resource Resource Vs. ITO, ITO, Exemption Exemption Ward, Ward, Centre, Centre, RPRC, RPRC, Nayapalli, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar IRC village, Bhubaneswar IRC village, Bhubaneswar PAN/GIR No PAN/GIR No.AABAR 5992 A (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri B.R.Pattnaik B.R.Pattnaik, CA Revenue by : Shri Charan Dass, Sr Charan Dass, Sr DR Date of Hearing : 11/0 06/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 11/0 /06/2024 O R D E R Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CTI(A), NFAC, Delhi CTI(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 30.11.2022 in Appeal No. CIT( CIT(A), Bhuabenswar- 3/10003/2019 3/10003/2019-20 for the assessment year 2016-17.
Shri B.R.Pattnaik, B.R.Pattnaik, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri the assessee and Shri Charan Dass, Ld Sr. DR appeared for the revenue. DR appeared for the revenue.
The appeal is time barred by 339 days. The assessee has filed The appeal is time barred by 339 days. The assessee has filed The appeal is time barred by 339 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition supported by affidavit, stating that the ld CIT(A) petition supported by affidavit, stating that the ld CIT(A) petition supported by affidavit, stating that the ld CIT(A) dismissed the 1st appeal mainly on the ground of delay in filing the audit dismissed the 1 appeal mainly on the ground of delay in filing the audit report in Form 10 report in Form 10-B. It is stated that although the income tax return was the income tax return was filed on 26.3.2018 but the audit report in Form 10B for the said year was filed on 26.3.2018 but the audit report in Form 10B for the said year was filed on 26.3.2018 but the audit report in Form 10B for the said year was P a g e 1 | 5
ITA No.2/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 filed on 18.2.2019. It was requested to the CIT(Exemption) Hyderabad to condone the delay in filing of Form 10B. During the pendency of the aforesaid delay condonation application, CIT(A) NFAC dismissed the 1st appeal . Thereafter, the appellant assessee consulted the legal counsel regarding the course of action to be taken in this regard. Only after getting the legal advice, the appeal was filed before the Tribunal and, therefore, there was delay of 339 days. It is prayed that since the delay was caused due to the fact that the condonation application was pending in filing the Form 10B, the delay in filing of appeal before the Tribunal be condoned. After considering the condonation petition and arguments of both the sides, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Hence, we condone the delay of 339 days and admit the appeal for adjudication.
It was submitted by ld AR that this is an appeal against the order u/s.143(1) of the Act issued by the CPC. It was the submission that as per the provisions of section 143(1), before making any adjustment, a show cause notice has to be issued to the assessee. It was the submission that no show cause notice has been issued to the assessee, therefore, the intimation issued u/s.143(1) is liable to be quashed. Ld AR referred to paper book page 86 & 87, in which, the ITO, Exemption Ward, Bhubaneswar in reply to resolution for grievance application that as per 1st proviso to clause (a0 of section 143(1), no adjustment to returned income can be made unless an intimation is given to the assessee of such proposed adjustments, has intimated that the desired documents not available as P a g e 2 | 5
ITA No.2/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17
reported by the CPC. Page 86 and 87 of paper book is extracted asfollows:
P a g e 3 | 5
ITA No.2/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17
In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that not in all cases, show cause notice in respect of intimation u/s.143(1) is required to be issued.
P a g e 4 | 5
ITA No.2/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of provisions of section 143(1) of the Act shows that it is compulsory for the revenue to issue show cause notice before making any adjustment in the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act. From the reply by the ITO, Exemption Ward, Bhubaneswar, as is evident from paper book page 86 & 87, it is clear that the intimation u/s.143(1) is not available with CPC. Hence, it is presumed that no intimation u/s.143(1) is issued to the assessee before making adjustment. This being so, as no show cause notice under the provisions of section 143(1) has been issued before making adjustment, the intimation issued u/s.143(1) stands quashed.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stand allowed.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 11/06/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 11/06/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Regional Plant Resource Centre, RPRC, Nayapalli, IRC village, Bhubaneswar 2. The Respondent: ITO, Exemption Ward, Bhubaneswar 3. The CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order
Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack P a g e 5 | 5