VIRCHOW LABORATORIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-17(2), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2141/HYD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 September 2020AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, in the interest of justice, remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The assessee was granted another opportunity to present its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order for AY 2014-15. The assessee's representative did not appear before the CIT(A) on the scheduled dates of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming additions under Section 14A, disallowance of weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB), and charging interest under Section 234C, especially in light of an ex-parte order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 35(2AB),Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD

Before: SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya
For Respondent: Shri Rajat Mitra, DR
Hearing: 16/09/2020Pronounced: 29/09/2020

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year:2014-15 Virchow Laboratories Vs. DCIT, Limited, Circle-17(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN: AAACV 7245 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Smt. S. Sandhya Revenue by: Shri Rajat Mitra, DR Date of hearing: 16/09/2020 Date of pronouncement: 29/09/2020 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT (A)-5, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0502/2016-17/CIT(A)-5, dated 26/10/2017 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the AY 2014- 15.

2.

The assessee has raised six grounds in its appeal and they are extracted herein below for reference:-

1.

The order of the Ld. CIT (A) is erroneous both on facts and in law.

2. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 15,05,071/- made by the Assessing Officer by applying the provisions U/s. 14A of the Act. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have considered the fact that the appellant did not derive any income which is exempt from tax and, therefore, no disallowance U/s. 14A can be made. 4. The ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance of weighted deduction allowable U/s. 35(2AB) of the Act of Rs. 77,32,596/- and the deduction allowable under the said section of Rs. 1,54,65,193/-. 5. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming charging of interest U/s. 234C of the Act of Rs. 5,21,722/-. 6. Any other ground or grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing.”

3.

At the outset, we observed that the Ld. CIT (A) has passed an ex-parte order because neither the assessee not its representative appeared before the Ld. CIT (A) on the given dates of hearing. On query, the Ld. AR pleaded that the appeal of the assessee may be remitted back to the file of ld. CIT (A) for fresh consideration. The ld. DR did not raise any serious objection for the same. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we hereby remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT (A) for de novo consideration thereby providing the assessee with one more opportunity to argue its case before the ld. CIT (A). We also direct the assessee and its representative to promptly co-operate before the Ld. CIT (A) in his proceedings failing which the Ld.CIT (A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merit based on the materials available before him.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above.

Pronounced in the open Court on 29th September, 2020.

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →