SAHEB INDUSTRIES,ANKLESHWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. BRR KUMAR & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL
PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”),
National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated
25.10.2023 passed for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:-
“1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer (CPC) in making addition of Rs. 59,08,339/- received from AOP
M/s. Neptune Associates and other interest of Rs. 2,43,465/- totaling Rs. 61,51,804
under the head income from other sources.
In fact, the interest received from AOP M/s. Neptune Associates of Rs.
59,08,339/- has already been disallowed and added back in total income U/s. 40(b) of the Income Tax Act in the Return of AOP M/s. Neptune Associates and interest income of Rs. 2,43,465/- has already been offered as income from other sources. Accordingly, total interest income of Rs. 61,51,804/- as mentioned in Form No. 26AS have already been considered by the appellant.
Asst.Year –2020-21
- 2–
Your appellant most humbly reserves the right to add, amend, alter or substitute the ground in this appeal on or before the time of hearing.”
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing of pharmaceuticals, medicinal chemicals and botanicals products. During the year under consideration, the assessee sold three industrial plots and claimed exemption amounting to Rs.4,10,00,000/- under Section 54G of the Act. On examination of facts of assessee’s case, the Assessing Officer reworked the capital gains on such sale of plots and also denied part of the exemption claimed under Section 54G of the Act and thereby assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 5,93,02,872/-. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer observed that there was consistent non-compliance on part of the assessee and accordingly, proceedings under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Act for non-compliance of notices issued under Section 142(1) of the Act, were also initiated against the assessee.
In appeal, Ld. CIT(A) observed that there was a delay of 45 days in filing of the appeal by the assessee, which Ld. CIT(A) refused to condone. Asst.Year –2020-21 - 3–
in the assessment order, which was having tax effect for approximately 1.5
crores on the assessee and therefore, Ld. CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal of the assessee on merits, instead of summarily dismissing the same.
On going through the facts of the instant case, we observe that the assesee has all through maintained an evasive and non-compliant approach in response to various notices issued by the Tax Authorities. However, looking into the quantum of additions made, in the interest of justice, the matter is hereby restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration. However, in view of the consistent non-cooperative approach of the assessee, a cost of Rs. 5,000/- is being imposed on the assessee for the purpose of setting-aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration and the same is directed to be deposited to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order is pronounced in the Open Court on 25/02/2025 (DR. BRR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 25/02/2025
TANMAY, Sr. PSआदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant
2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent.
3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT
4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)-
5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad
6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.