M/S. INSPECTORATE GRIFFITH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA,, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITTPA 14/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 August 2026AY 2013-20145 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal had been filed by the assessee against the final assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act, but inadvertently, Section 143(1) was mentioned in Form No. 35. The Tribunal noted that all other details, including the statement of facts and grounds of appeal, clearly indicated that the appeal was against the final assessment order. The Tribunal also observed that the assessee had attempted to clarify this issue when notices were received, but the CIT(Appeals) had dismissed the appeal in limine. Considering these facts and the submissions, the Tribunal decided to remit the appeal back to the file of the CIT(Appeals) with a direction to admit the appeal, adjudicate all grounds on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, in accordance with law. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Inspectorate Griffith India Private Limited, filed its return for Assessment Year 2013-14 on November 30, 2013. The case was selected for scrutiny, and a reference was made to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under Section 92CA. The TPO passed an order on October 25, 2016, proposing an upward adjustment of Rs. 1,55,03,353/-. Based on this, a draft assessment order was issued on December 23, 2016. The assessee informed the authorities that it would appeal to the CIT(Appeals) and not the Dispute Resolution Panel. Consequently, the Assessing Officer passed a final assessment order on January 17, 2017, incorporating the transfer pricing adjustment. The assessee appealed to the CIT(Appeals), but the appeal was dismissed on the ground that it was filed against an order under Section 143(1), despite the assessee's clarification that it was against an order under Section 143(3). The assessee then filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT should restore the appeal to the file of the CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merits, given that the CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of a wrong section mentioned in Form No. 35, while other details indicated the appeal was against the final assessment order passed under Section 143(3). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the appeal was intended to be against the final assessment order passed under Section 143(3), and the mention of Section 143(1) in Form No. 35 was an inadvertent error. The assessee requested that the appeal be restored to the CIT(Appeals) for a decision on the merits of the grounds raised. Revenue's Contention: The learned DR did not raise any objection to remitting the appeal back to the CIT(Appeals).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 143(3),Section 92CA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member IT(TP) A 14/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s Inspectorate Griffith India Private Limited....................................................Appellant 16th Floor, Unit 1601 Block EM04, Eco Centre, Salt Lake, Sector V, Bidhannagar PS East, North 24, Paraganas, Kolkata- 700091 [PAN No. AABCI0315E] Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax……..…………………....……….Respondent Circle-11(1), Kolkata- 700069

Appearances by: P. Jhunjhunwala, Advocate and Sakshi Singhi(Adv), appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Sailendra Kumar Pandey, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : July 21, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : August 21 ,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.03.2026 of the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, passed under Section 143(1) of the Assessment Year 2013-14of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

2.

The brief facts of the assessee is that Inspectorate Griffith India Private Limited ("Appellant") had filed its return for the AY 2013-14 on November 30, 2013 which was selected for scrutiny and reference was also made to the Transfer Pricing Officer in terms of section 92CA of the Income Tax Act, 1961

IT (TP) A 14./Kol/2026 Assessment Year- -2013-14 ("Act") and a Transfer Pricing Order dated October 25, 2016 was passed suggesting an upward adjustment of Rs. 1,55,03,353/- to the international transactions of the Appellant. On the basis of the said TP Order, a draft assessment order dated December 23, 2016 was passed. In response, the Appellant by its letter dated December 30, 2016 communicated that it would be filing an appeal before the CIT(Appeals) and would not be approaching the Dispute Resolution Panel (Para 6 at Pg 3 of Assessment Order: running Pg 20 of Appeal Set). Accordingly, the Assessing Officer passed the final assessment order dated January 17, 2017 making, inter alia, the addition on account of transfer pricing adjustment which was the primary addition.

Aggrieved by the said order assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) wherein appeal of the assessee has been dismissed by the CIT(A) only on this ground that appeal has been filed against an order u/s 143(1) though the assessee has clarified that the intended appeal was against an order u/s 143(3).

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied the assessee preferred appeal before us.

3.

The ld. AR instead of arguing on the merit of the case has only prayed that the appeal of the assessee be restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to admit the appeal and adjudicate all the grounds raised by the assessee on merit after providing reasonable opportunity being heard, as the 2

IT (TP) A 14./Kol/2026 Assessment Year- -2013-14 CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal only on account of wrong section mentioned in the Form No. 35 though other details was before the CIT(A) to establish that appeal has been filed against the final assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act.

The learned DR did not raise any objection in remitting the appeal of the assessee to the file of the CIT(A).

4.

Upon hearing the submission of the counsel and on perusal of the impugned order we find that appeal had been filed by the assessee against the final assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act but in form No. 35 it has been mentioned as appeal against the order u/s 143(1) instead of 143(3). It is pertinent to mention here that all other details established that appeal has been filed against the final assessment order, statement of facts and grounds mentioned are all indicates that assessee filed appeal against the final assessment order. It is further pertinent to mention here that assessee had tried to clarify the matter when he received notices but CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine.

5.

Keeping in view the above facts and considering the submission made by the assessee we are remitting the appeal of the assessee to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to admit the appeal as it has been filed against u/s

IT (TP) A 14./Kol/2026 Assessment Year- -2013-14 143(3), adjudicate all the grounds raised by the assessee on merits after being heard of the assessee in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Kolkata, the 21st August , 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member

DC Dated: 21 .08.2026.

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order Deputy Registrar, Kolkata Benches

IT (TP) A 14./Kol/2026 Assessment Year- -2013-14

More judgments on Section 92CA

All 3,978 judgments and leading authorities on Section 92CA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →