M/S PROSIM RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(1)(3), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1314/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 November 2019AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(A) is bound to pass an order on merits even if the assessee does not appear. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer added Rs. 1,13,59,703/- to the assessee's income for failure to deduct tax at source under Section 195. The CIT(A) decided the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 195

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH: BENGALURU

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH

Hearing: 27.11.2019

O R D E R PER D.S. SUNDER SINGH, A.M. : This appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Bengaluru (hereafter referred as “CIT(A)”) in 5/2016-17 dated 27/02/2018 for the assessment year 2014-15.

2.

All the grounds of appeal

are related to the addition of Rs. 1,13,59,703/- u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). The assessee filed return of income declaring at total income of Rs. 60,68,280/- on 29.11.2014 and the assessment was completed on total income of Rs. 1,74,27,983/- by an order dated 26.12.2016. The Assessing Officer (AO) made the addition of Rs. 1,13,59,703/- for the assessee’s failure to deduct tax at source u/s. 195 of the Act. The assessee went on appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal exparte following the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

38. ITD 320. Against which, the assessee filed appeal before us.

3. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record. In the instance case, the ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal exparte following the decision of Multiplan India Ltd., supra and the ld. CIT(A) did not consider the merits while disposing the appeal. As per the provisions of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) is bound to pass order on merits even there is no response from the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to afford opportunity to the assessee to decide the appeal on merits. The ld. DR assured that he will co-operate with the ld. CIT(A) and furnish all the information required for disposal of the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 29th November, 2019.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →