RAGHUKUL TRADING PVT. LTD.,NOIDA vs. DCIT CIRCLE-2, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2016/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 April 2022AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the peculiar facts and the jurisdictional issue, decided to remand the case back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision. This was done to ensure a just decision and afford the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal and the revenue's cross-objection were against an order upholding the disallowance of expenditure under Section 14A. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A), leading to the disallowance. The revenue also raised a jurisdictional issue regarding the CIT(A)'s authority.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the disallowance of expenditure under Section 14A and the jurisdiction of the CIT(A) to decide the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 250(6),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY

Hearing: 04/04/2022Pronounced: 04/04/2022

Heard together (2 matters)

CO No. 108/Del/2019
ITA No. 2016/Del/2019

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J. M.: 1. The present appeal has been preferred by the Assessee whereas, the Cross objection by the Revenue Department against the order dated 28.09.2018 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-I, Noida (in short „Ld. Commissioner‟) u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short „the Act‟) whereby, the Ld. Commissioner upheld the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act.

2.

Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. The only issue raised by the Assessee before us relates to affirmation of disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A of the Act, by the Ld. Commissioner. It appears from the impugned order that though the Assessee vide letter dated 19.09.2018 placed the necessary documents on record before the Ld. Commissioner however, failed to appear in the appellate proceeding and consequently the Ld. Commissioner decided the issue u/s 14A of the Act against the Assessee on the ground that the Assessee did not bring anything on record in order to establish its claim.

2.1 The claim of the revenue department by way of cross objection is that because Assessment Order has been passed by the AO situated at Ghaziabad, therefore the appeal should have been decided by Ld. CIT(A) Ghaziabad but not by the Ld. Commissioner, Noida who lacks jurisdiction.

2.2 Considering the above stated peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in context of rival claims of the parties, for the just decision of the case and in the interest of justice, parties agreed to and even otherwise we deem it appropriate to remand the case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) having jurisdiction of this case for decision afresh, suffice to say while affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee, hence, ordered accordingly. Page | 2

3.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee and Cross objection filed by the Revenue Department stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on /04/2022.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →