M/S CHAMPION ADVANCE MATERIALS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1974/MUM/2022Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 October 2022AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal as withdrawn based on an incorrect assumption about the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed as withdrawn, with the CIT(A) concluding that the assessee had availed the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. However, the assessee contended that this was incorrect for the specific assessment in question.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was correct in dismissing the appeal as withdrawn when the assessee had not availed the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for the relevant assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C‘ BENCH

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI M.BALAGANESH

For Appellant: Mr. Manoj Kataruka, Adv
For Respondent: Mr. Dharamvir D. Yadav
Hearing: 17/10/2022Pronounced: 17/10/2022

आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M):

1.

This appeal in A.Y.2014-15 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) in appeal No. NFAC/2013- 14/10118431 dated 30/06/2022 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 31/03/2022 by the ld. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).

M/s. Champion Advance Materials Pvt. Ltd.,

2.

Though the assessee has raised the various grounds, but we deem it fit to adjudicate the preliminary ground raised by the assessee that the ld. CIT(A) had erred in dismissing the appeal as withdrawn which is contrary to the facts and material evidences on record.

3.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. In this case, two assessments were framed on the assessee i.e. u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. The impugned appeal arises from the proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. The assessee had availed Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme in respect of disputes arising out of assessment framed u/s.143(3) of the Act. This fact was stated before the ld. CIT(A) when an appeal against 143(3) order was pending and the said appeal was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A). As far as the impugned appeal emanating out of the reassessment proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee had only sought adjournment before the ld. CIT(A) on the scheduled date of hearing. However, the ld. CIT(A) erred in concluding that assessee had availed Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. Before us the ld. AR stated that assessee had not availed Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for settling its tax disputes arising out of assessment framed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. The ld. DR also fairly agreed on this fact. Hence, we deem it fit and appropriate in the interest of justice and fair play to remand this appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication in accordance with law for adjudication of all the grounds raised by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A).The assessee is also at liberty to raise additional grounds and additional evidences, if any to support its contentions. In view of above, adjudication of the other

M/s. Champion Advance Materials Pvt. Ltd., grounds become academic in nature and assessee is at liberty to address all those grounds before the ld. CIT(A).

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 17/10/2022.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →