Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F ” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, AM & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM
Per Bench:
These appeals have been filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘ld.CIT(A) for short), National Faceless Appeal
Centre (‘NFAC’ for short) passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act'),
pertaining to the Assessment Years (‘A.Y.’ for short) 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16.
As the facts are identical in all the appeals, we hereby pass a consolidated order,
by taking ITA No. 2064/Mum/2022 as the lead case.
It is observed that the assessee has filed these appeals belatedly after a delay of 77
days which the assessee prays to be condoned as there was ‘sufficient cause’ for the
2 ITA Nos. 2604, 2605, 2606 & 2607/Mum/2022 (A.Ys.2013-14 to 2015-16) Faze Three Autofab Limited vs.Dy. CIT delay. After hearing both the side and perusing the decisions cited by the assessee, we
deem it fit to condone the delay of 76 days in filing these appeals.
The assessee has challenged the ex parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A),
confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of
the Act and challenging the reopening, the addition on interest income and disallowance
of deprecation as per section 43A of the Act.
The brief facts are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of
manufacturing of automotive fabrics, textile fabric, laminated woven and knitted fabric.
The assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 dated 30.11.2013, declaring total
income at Rs.2,15,70,870/-. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny and assessment
order dated 04.03.2016 was passed by the A.O. Subsequent to this, the assessee’s case
was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act for the reason that the A.O. observed interest income,
amounting to Rs.10,86,876/- was credited under the head ‘other income’ in the profit and
loss account, whereas, it was observed that under the head ‘other current assets’, interest
receivable for the current year was shown at Rs.30,73,017/-. The A.O. has stated that as
the assessee was following mercantile system of accounting, the interest income received
or receivable has to be credited to the profit and loss account, whereas the assessee has
offered interest income, which is less by Rs.19,86,141/-, has resulted in under assessment
of income, leading to short levy of tax, amounting to Rs.6,44,403/-. For this reason, the
A.O. has reopened the assessment of the assessee on the belief that income has escaped
assessment. The assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 dated 12.12.2019 was passed by
the A.O., determining the total income at Rs.2,71,94,630/- and the interest income,
3 ITA Nos. 2604, 2605, 2606 & 2607/Mum/2022 (A.Ys.2013-14 to 2015-16) Faze Three Autofab Limited vs.Dy. CIT amounting to Rs.19,86,141/- was added to the total income of the assessee as ‘interest not
offered’. The A.O. has also disallowed consequential depreciation, amounting to
Rs.36,37,621/- as per section 43A of the Act.
Aggrieved by this, the assessee was in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who
confirmed the additions/disallowances made by the A.O, by an ex parte order on the
ground that the assessee has not made due compliance before the first appellate authority.
Further aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
The ld. Authorized Representative (AR for the assessee) contended that the ld.
CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order by not considering the adjournment applications
filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR also relied on the co-ordinate
bench decision in assessee’s own case in ITA Nos. 1463 & 1465/Mum/2022 for A.Ys.
2010-11 and 2012-13, vide order dated 26.08.2022, in which the assessee was given one
more opportunity to present its case before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR stated that the
assessee has a got a case on merit and prayed for restoring the file back to the file of the
ld. CIT(A) for adjudication.
The ld. Departmental Representative (ld. DR for short) vehemently opposed to the
request of the assessee.
Having heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.
We deem it fit and proper to provide one last opportunity to the assessee to present its
case before the ld. CIT(A) in the interest of principles of natural justice. The assessee is
also directed to present its case before the ld. CIT(A) without any further delay. Hence,
4 ITA Nos. 2604, 2605, 2606 & 2607/Mum/2022 (A.Ys.2013-14 to 2015-16) Faze Three Autofab Limited vs.Dy. CIT all these appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh
adjudication by giving opportunity to the assessee to present its case.
In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical
purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 16.12.2022
Sd/- Sd/-
(Amarjit Singh) (Kavitha Rajagopal) Accountant Member Judicial Member Mumbai; Dated : 16.12.2022 Roshani, Sr. PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT - concerned 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard File BY ORDER,
(Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai