AJINKYATARA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,SATARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA,

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1767/PUN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 July 2022AY 2004-053 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed the order ex parte without granting the assessee sufficient opportunity. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) for non-appearance and lack of adjournment. The assessee contended that an adjournment was filed and that insufficient time was given to present their case. The appeal was filed 25 days late, but the delay was condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without granting adequate opportunity to the assessee, and whether the disallowance of SICOM Sales Tax loan was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A”

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Sandbhor – AR
For Respondent: Shri S P Walimbe – DR
Hearing: 08/06/2022Pronounced: 07/07/2022

ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-13, Pune, dated 31.07.2019 for the A.Y.2004-05. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Id. CIT(A) has grossly erred in disposing of the appeal in liminie, on the ground that the appellant neither appeared nor filed an adjournment, ignoring the fact that the appellant had filed for an adjournment.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order of CIT(A) is erroneous in as much as the same has been passed without granting the appellant enough time to represent the matter and produce relevant details.

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the disallowance in respect of SICOM Sales Tax loan.

A.Y. 2004-05 Ajinkyatara SSK Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Satara Circle, Satara (A)

4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Id. CIT(A) has grossly erred in sustaining disallowance in respect of SICOM Sale Tax loan, considering the same to be Government dues and thus invoking section 43B.

5.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and without prejudice to Ground No.3 the Id. CIT(A) has grossly erred in sustaining the disallowance of SICOM Sales Tax loan in as much as the same is in nature of capital receipt and hence the disallowance cannot be sustained.” 2. The appeal is time barred by 25 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit attributing the reasons of delay. We are satisfied with the reasons so stated. We, therefore, admit the appeal, for adjudication.

3.

It is seen that the AO completed the assessment u/s.143(3) determining total loss at Rs.(-)7,01,69,940/- as against the assessee returned income for the year under consideration declaring its total loss at Rs.7,57,76,728/-. The ld.CIT(A) passed the order ex parte after recording in para 2.3 of the impugned order that three opportunities were given to the assessee, which were not availed. In the absence of any supporting material from the side of assessee, the ld.CIT(A) upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.44,20,887/-. In the aforesaid factual background, we deem it appropriate to grant another opportunity to the assessee to represent his case before the ld.CIT(A). The impugned order is set-aside and the matter is remitted to the file of the ld.CIT(A) with a direction to dispose of the appeal afresh on merits as per law after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In such fresh

A.Y. 2004-05 Ajinkyatara SSK Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Satara Circle, Satara (A) proceedings, the assessee will be at liberty to lead any fresh evidence as he considers expedient for his case.

4.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced in the open Court on 7th July, 2022.

More judgments on Section 43B

All 7,161 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →