VISHAL PAPER TECH (INDIA) LTD.,MUBARKPUR vs. ACIT, C-2(1), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1035/CHANDI/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 January 2020AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case back for fresh adjudication. This was done to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard, adhering to the principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed additional depreciation and MAT credit. The Assessing Officer denied the additional depreciation, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to the assessee's non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to be heard by the CIT(A) and whether the denial of additional depreciation and MAT credit claims were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 32(1)(iia),Section 115JAA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आदेश/Order

PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT

This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dt. 18/04/2019 of Ld. CIT(A)-1, Chandigarh.

2.

At the time of hearing nobody was present on behalf of the assessee, therefore, the appeal is decided ex-parte after hearing the Ld. DR.

3. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal:

1.

That the ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law for rejecting our claim for additional depreciation amounting to Rs. 8707199/- while the assessee fulfills all the conditions prescribed under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. 2. that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law in not allowing the MAT credit under section 115JAA of Income Tax Act 1961 when there is credit of Rs. 16574724/-lying in the account.

3.

The assessee craves permission to file additional evidence, add, amend or delete any ground of appeal

before he finalization of appellate proceedings.

1.

4. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed its return of income on 30/09/2015 declaring an income of Rs. 1,27,05,760/-. Later on the case was selected for scrutiny. The A.O. framed the assessment at an income of Rs. 2,14,12,959/- by making the addition of Rs. 87,07,199/- which was made by denying the additional depreciation claimed by the assessee.

5.

Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal by passing the ex-parte order. Ld. CIT(A) mentioned that various notices were issued to the assessee as per following details:

Date of issue of Date of hearing Remarks notice 28/12/2018 15/01/2019 Ld. AR appeared, sough adjournment. Case was adjourned to 18/02/2019 18/02/2019 Ld. AR appeared, again sought adjournment. Case was adjourned to 15/03/2019 15/03/2019 Ld. AR appeared, asked for more time. Again, case was adjourned to 18/04/2019. 18/04/2019 No attendance. Nor any written submission or letter for adjournment was filed till the disposal of this appeal.

He decided the appeal ex-parte since nobody appeared on 18/04/2019.

6.

Now the assessee is in appeal.

7.

Ld. DR supported the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee did not appear on the date given for the hearing, by the Ld. CIT(A) therefore there was no alternative except to decide the appeal ex-parte.

8.

We have considered the submissions of the Ld. DR and perused the material available on the record. In the present case, the Ld. CIT(A) mentioned that no written submission was furnished and the assessee also did not appear on 18/04/2019, he also mentioned that the case was earlier fixed on 15/03/2019 and adjourned to 18/04/2019 however it is not clear as to whether the said date was communicated to the assessee. It is well settled that nobody should be condemned, unheard as per the maxim, “audi alteram pertam”. We therefore by keeping in view the principles of natural justice, deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

9.

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

(Order pronounced in the open Court on 23/01/2020 )

More judgments on Section 32(1)(iia)

All 553 judgments and leading authorities on Section 32(1)(iia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →