BASF INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In this regard we noticed that assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. 1,58,72,92,540/- subsequently pursuant to the assessment proceedings the AO passed final assessment order dated 24.01.2017 u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147C(3a) of the Act thereby making different additions.

Against that final assessment order, Assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Subsequently the AO initiated reassessment proceedings and pursuant to the submissions of the assessee, passed reassessment order dated 08.05.2023 u/s 147 of the Act, wherein no additions were made to the income of the assessee as per Final assessment order. However in the computation sheet forming part of said reassessment order, the credit for dividend distribution tax, advance tax, self-assessment tax and regular assessment taxes paid till the date of passing such re-assessment order was not granted. BASF India Ltd. Mumbai.

As per the assessee it constitutes a mistake apparent from the record therefore the assessee filed rectification application dated 07.06.2023 with the juri ictional AO seeking allowance of credit for taxes paid by BIL for A.Y 2013-14 and the same is pending for disposal before the AO. The assessee has filed Annexure -1 as copy of rectification application.

The assessee also filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against non grant of credit for taxes paid. The assessee then entered into Advance Pricing Agreement ('APA') with the Central Board of Direct Taxes on 20 July 2023 pursuant to which the underlying transaction in respect of which transfer pricing adjustment was made, got covered under the APA. Pursuant to such APA, the assessee filed modified return of income under section 92CD of the Act on 31 October 2023. Thereafter, the AO passed an order giving effect ('OGE') dated 31 March 2025 for giving effect to the APA and modified return of income filed by the Appellant, wherein the credit for advance tax, self- assessment tax and regular assessment taxes paid by the assessee (including by way of refund adjustment) has been granted.

However, Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to pass ex-parte order on 07.01.2025 thereby dismissing the appeal filed by assessee against which the assessee has filed the present BASF India Ltd. Mumbai.

Whereas on the contrary Ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the revenue authorities.

Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that assessee was ex-parte and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) without considering the order giving effect dated 31.03.2025, therefore keeping in view the interest of justice, the Bench is of the view that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A). Hence considering the overall circumstances of the present case as discussed by us above, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the matter afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. BASF India Ltd. Mumbai.

Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law.

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

At the outset assessee has moved an application for raising the additional ground. In this regard we found that the same is legal in nature and it goes to the roots of the case, therefore while following the principles laid down in the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of The Jute Corporation India Ltd., Vs. CIT, 187 ITR 688 submissions in regard to notice issue by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which reads as under: We refer to the captioned notice dated 19 December 2024, issued by NFAC in relation to the appeal filed by the Appellant on 24 February 2017 against the final assessment order dated 24 January 2017 passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(3)(a) of the Act for AY 2013-14 by the learned Assessing Officer and received by the Appellant on 30 January 2017. Copy of the captioned notice and impugned order enclosed at Annexure 1 and Annexure 2 respectively. In this connection, the Appellant wishes to submit that the notice includes ground raised against the transfer pricing adjustment proposed by the learned Transfer pricing Officer (refer ground no 7 raised in the appeal documents filed by BIL, enclosed as Annexure 3). We understand that the appeals relating to inter-alia international taxation/ transfer pricing issues continue under the juri iction of the juri ictional Commissioner of income- tax (Appeals) as per the notification no 113/2022 dated 13 October 2022 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Copy of the notification enclosed as Annexure 4. We also wish to highlight that appeals on similar grounds for AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 have recently been adjudicated by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - 55, Mumbai, Accordingly, we kindly request your Honour to transfer the appeal proceedings. We sincerely regret any inconvenience caused and trust that your Honour will accede to our request and oblige. In case your Honour does not agree to our request, we request your Honour to provide us an opportunity to provide additional submissions and for personal hearing via video conferencing before your Honour to present our case. 11. Since opportunity of personal hearing via video conferencing was not provided to the assessee as assessee BASF India Ltd. Mumbai.