Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a public limited company engaged in investment and financing, filed its return for AY 2012-13. The case was reopened and completed under Section 143(3)/147, with an addition for disallowed trading loss. A discrepancy was noted in the depreciation added back.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(Appeals) did not properly apply its mind to the grounds of appeal and allowed the appeal for statistical purposes. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) properly considered the grounds of appeal and if the matter should be remitted for natural justice and examination of additional evidence.
Sections Cited
143(3), 147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)
Date of concluding the hearing: January 22, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: February 26, 2025 O R D E R
The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 20th August, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2012-13.
(A.Y. 2012-2013) Classic Growers Limited 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Public Limited Company engaged in the business of investment, financing and trading of shares and registered with RBI as a Non-Banking Financial Company. The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 on 17.09.2012 declaring total income at Rs.4,26,660/-. Subsequently, the case was reopened and completed on 28.12.2019 under section 143(3)/147 of the Act by the ld. Assessing Officer calculating on the tax on addition at Rs.41,25,540/- which was disallowed as trading loss. The assessee debited depreciation of Rs.3,07,74,923/- in his profit & loss account for the A.Y. 2017-18 and it was observed from the computation of income that the assessee added back only Rs.2,76,32,009/- as per Company Act. The amount of depreciation debited in the profit & loss account should be added back in computation of income of the assessee. As the assessee added back only an amount of Rs.2,76,32,009/- instead of Rs.3,07,74,923/-, the balance amount of Rs.31,42,914/- is added back in computation of income.
On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.
On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.
I have heard both the sides. It was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the assessee had made its (A.Y. 2012-2013) Classic Growers Limited submissions before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), but the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not apply his mind and did not consider the grounds of appeal on merit. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the ld. CIT(Appeals) partly allowed the appeal of assessee without elaborate discussion of the grounds of appeal and also on merit.
6. On the other hand, it was the submission of the ld. Departmental Representative that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has given many opportunities to the assessee and the assessee neither filed written submission nor any evidence before the ld. CIT(Appeals). He further submitted that before the ITAT, the assessee did not substantiate its claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the orders passed by the revenue authorities.
I have perused the material available on record. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case to remit the matter back to the file of ld. Assessing Officer in order to meet the principle of natural justice and to examine the additional evidence filed by the assessee and pass a detailed speaking order. I also direct the ld. Counsel for the assessee to file all the relevant documents before the ld. Assessing Officer to substantiate the case of the assessee. If the assessee fails to submit any documentary evidence, then the ld. Assessing Officer will be at liberty to pass an order basing on the material available on record. Hence, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
(A.Y. 2012-2013) Classic Growers Limited 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26/02/2025.