CHOICE ESTATES AND CONSTRUCTIONS P. LTD,COCHIN vs. DCIT, KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 503/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao (Accountant Member), Shri Prakash Chand Yadav (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had not judiciously adjudicated the Section 43B disallowance. Consequently, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, after providing the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for Assessment Year 2017-18, with a delay of 134 days which was condoned. The core issue pertains to a disallowance of Rs. 68,72,247 under Section 43B.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the disallowance under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act and the condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

Pronounced: 22.05.2025

Asst.Year 2017-2018 Choice Estates and The Dy.Commissioner of Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. Income-tax Choice House, Corporate Circle 1(1) Kochi. P.V.Sreedharan Road Kumbalam, Cochin–682 506 PAN : AABCC3214C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : --- None --- Respondent by : Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR Date of Pronouncement : 22.05.2025 Date of Hearing : 21.05.2025. O R D E R

Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM :

1.

The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre / learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short] dated 27.12.2022, having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1048253558(1) and relates to the assessment year 2017- 2018.

2.

There is a delay of 134 days in the present appeal, for which the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay. The learned DR opposed the application filed by the assessee for condonation of delay. We have seen the application for the condonation of delay duly supported by a . Choice Estates and Construction Pvt.Ltd. sworn affidavit of the Director of the assessee-company. For the reasons mentioned in the condonation application, we hereby condone the delay of 134 days and proceed to decide the appeal on the merits.

3.

Today, when the matter was called up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite proper service of notice. However, this being an old appeal, we dispose of this appeal on merits.

4.

The learned DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

5.

At the outset, we observe that the ld.CIT (A) has not at all adjudicated the disallowance u/s.43B amounting to Rs.68,72,247 in a judicious manner. Therefore, we restore this matter to the file of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer to decide the matter in accordance with law. Needless to say, the AO shall afford meaningful opportunity of being heard to the assessee before passing any order.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 22nd day of May, 2025.

More judgments on Section 43B

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →