CALSEA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT CORP RANGE 1, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITTPA 4/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 October 2024AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal accepted the prayer of the assessee's Learned AR. It was held that the appeal should be restored to the file of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal directed the assessee to substantiate its case before the CIT(A). It was also noted that adequate opportunity of hearing would be granted to the assessee. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. The specific grounds of appeal related to Transfer Pricing adjustments and disallowance of prior period expenses were not adjudicated on merits by the ITAT, as the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Calsea Footwear Private Limited, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai, for Assessment Year 2012-13. The appeal arose from an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on December 1, 2023, which in turn was based on an assessment framed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) read with Section 92CA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on April 25, 2016. The AO had made Transfer Pricing adjustments and disallowed prior period expenses. The assessee had filed a further appeal but failed to make an effective representation before the CIT(A). The ITAT noted a delay of 29 days in filing the present appeal, which was condoned.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be restored to the file of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for fresh adjudication, considering the assessee's failure to make an effective representation in the prior proceedings. Assessee's Contention: The assessee, through its Learned Authorized Representative (AR), prayed for the restoration of the appeal to the file of the Learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee sought an opportunity to substantiate its case before the lower appellate authority. Revenue's Contention: The Learned Senior Departmental Representative (DR) opposed the prayer for restoration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 92CA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Respondent: Ms. Pushpa Hemachand (JCIT) –Ld. DR

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arises out of an order passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-16 CIT(A)] on 01-12-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA of the Act on 25-04-2016. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made Transfer Pricing adjustments and also disallowed prior period expenses. Though the assessee preferred further appeal, it failed to

make any effective representation therein as noted in para 4.1 of the impugned order. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The limited prayer of Ld. AR is to restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The same has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. The registry has noted delay of 29 days in the appeal which stand condoned. 2. Accepting the prayer of Ld. AR, we restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication with a direction to the assessee to substantiate the same. Needless to add that adequate opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. 3. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 07th October, 2024.

Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा23 /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद; / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे+ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 07-10-2024 DS आदेश की Wितिलिप अ8ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT Chennai. 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 92CA

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →