Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT
O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM:
This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Hisar, dated 28.01.2020, pertaining to the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
“1. That the order of learned CIT(A) is bad in law, against facts of the case and equity.
2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal of appellant without considering the submissions made and documents furnished by it in totality.
That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law,
R.K. Ispat Ltd. Vs. DCIT learned CIT (A) erred in not adjudicating the grounds of appeal as contested by the appellant. In the appellate order, some of the grounds either has not been considered at all or has been adjudicated partly.
4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT(A) erred in sustaining the action of AO in making disallowance of claim of depreciation amounting to for Rs 27844/-without appreciating the submissions of the appellant.
5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT(A) erred in sustaining the action of AO in making disallowance of claim of deduction of Rs. 3010949/- from book profit while calculating MAT, in violation of express provisions of section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and documents available in record.
6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the grounds of appeal relating to action of AO in making disallowance of claim of deduction of Rs. 3010949/- while calculating MAT when the issue was outside the scope of 'limited scrutiny assessment'
That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally adjudicated upon.”
As per office report, there is delay of two days in filing the appeal. The assessee has claimed condonation of delay by relying on the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in writ petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 dated 10.01.2022. The delay of two days in filing the appeal is, therefore, condoned and the appeal is taken up for hearing on merits.
R.K. Ispat Ltd. Vs. DCIT 3. At the time of hearing no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. It is seen that the notices sent have returned back. Therefore, the appeal was taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee and is being decided on the basis of the material available on record.
Learned Sr. DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue submitted that there is no infirmity into the orders of the authorities below. The assessee was required to provide certificate of being sic company which he failed to do so.
I have heard learned DR and perused the material available on record. It is seen from the record that the Assessing Officer had made addition of Rs. 55,688/- by disallowing the claim of the assessee for depreciation on account of plant and machinery. He also made addition of Rs. 30,10,949/- by disallowing the claim for deduction on account of profit on sick company for calculating MAT. Before the learned CIT(Appeals) it was argued on behalf of the assessee that provisions of Section 115JB would not be applicable. This submission of the assessee was rejected by the learned CIT(Appeals) on the basis that the assessee failed to produce certificate regarding sick unit. Therefore, considering the totality of facts and taking into account that assessee has taken specific ground contending that issues raised before the learned CIT(Appeals) were not properly adjudicated, I set aside the order of the learned CIT(Appeals) and restore the matter to the file of R.K. Ispat Ltd. Vs. DCIT learned CIT(Appeals) with the direction to decide the issue of applicability of MAT after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 20.09.2022.