SUCRAMP PHARMACEUTICALS PVT LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT COMPANY CIRCLE IV(4), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3141/CHNY/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 November 2022AY 2009-103 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the appeal filed by the assessee was significantly time-barred by 1751 days. The assessee did not provide any petition for condonation of delay or explanation for the delay.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under section 80-IC for assessment year 2009-10. The Assessing Officer rejected this deduction, and the CIT(A) upheld the disallowance. The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal due to a substantial delay without any valid explanation or condonation petition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80-IC,Section 139(4),Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA

Hearing: 14.11.2022Pronounced: 14.11.2022

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ �यायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी महावीर �सह, उपा�य� एवं एवं �ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद�य के सम� BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 3141/Chny/2018 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Sucramp Pharmaceuticals The Assistant Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd., v. Income Tax, H 37-J, Manthoppu Colony, Company Circle IV(4), 8th Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 083. [PAN: AAKCS-2196-J] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) : Shri. G. Anish, Advocate for अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/Appellant by T. Vasudevan, Advocate : Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by सुनवाई क� तारीख/Date of Hearing : 14.11.2022 घोषणा क� तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 14.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) –VI, Chennai, dated 19.11.2013 and pertains to assessment year 2009-10.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1. The order of the learned CIT (Appeals) is contrary to law, facts and evidence on record and opposed to principles of natural justice and fair procedure and erred in denying deduction u/s section 80-IC/ /chapter VIA :-2-: ITA. No:3141/Chny/2018 of the income tax Act and failed to appreciate that the Law bends before justice and justice forms part of basic structure of the Constitution.

2. The learned CIT (A) fundamentally filed to appreciate, that the appellant is viz:- is entitled to relief/exemption for the reasons stated, namely: (a) Assessee had filed the return of income u/s 139 (4) of the Act (b) The mistake in no filing the return was due to mistake committed by Accountant who is specialising only in sales tax (c) The administrative authorities should not whittle down the plenitude of exemption or relief granted by the parliament (d) No adjustment /disallowance can be made in 1431) assessment (€) The gross error committed by the CIT and (f) Had allowed the appeal on identical grounds for the next year 3. The appellant craves leave to file additional grounds.”

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing of drugs and medicines, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2009-10 on 23.12.2009, declaring Nil total income, after claiming deduction u/s. 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The assessment has been completed u/s. 143(1) of the Act on 06.09.2010 and determined total income of Rs. 11,03,590/-, by rejecting deduction claimed u/s. 80IC of the Act. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellant authority, but could not succeed. The Ld. CIT(A) vide their order dated 19.11.2013 rejected the ground taken by the assessee and sustained the additions made towards disallowance of :-3-: ITA. No:3141/Chny/2018 deduction u/s. 80IC of the Act. Aggrieved by the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.

4.

We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. During the course of hearing, we find that the appeal filed by the assessee is time barred by 1751 days. The assessee neither filed petition for condonation of delay nor explained reasons for not filing appeal in time. Therefore, we presume that there is no valid reason for the assessee to file appeal with a delay of 1751 days and thus, we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee as not maintainable.

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 80-IC

All 262 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80-IC →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →