EL FORGE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(3), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3402/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 February 2020AY 2007-084 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without giving an effective opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside for fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The assessee's claim for deduction under Section 54G was rejected by the Assessing Officer through a rectification order. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte without considering submissions or giving adequate opportunity.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly considered the assessee's submissions and provided an adequate opportunity to be heard before dismissing the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54G,Section 154,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ C ” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN

Hearing: 12.02.2020

आदेश/ O R D E R

PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The assessee filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Chennai in ITA

No.142/CIT (A)-6/10-11/AY2007-08, dated 01.11.2019 for the assessment year 2007-08.

2.

The assessee, M/s.EL Forge Limited, is a Company engaged in the business of manufacturing of rough steel forgins and filed its return of income for the impugned assessment year on 31.10.2007.

The said return was initially processed u/s.143(1) of the Act and the Assessing Officer, after considering the petition u/s.154 of the Act, passed the order of rectification rejecting the claim of deduction u/s.54G of the Act on the ground that since there is no claim in the Return for deduction u/s.54G, rectification of the intimation for granting the said deduction u/s.54G does not arise.

3.

It was submitted by Ld. A.R. that the assessee filed an appeal against the order passed by the A.O. under Section 154 of the Act dated 01.10.2009. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that the learned CIT(A), without considering the written submissions with the enclosures of 105 pages filed before him and without giving adequate opportunity to the assessee, and without notifying that there was a delay of 462 days in filing the appeal etc., dismissed the appeal exparte and also dismissed the appeal on technical ground as the assessee has not attached the order under dispute along with the demand notice and appeal fees paid.

4.

Per contra, the Ld. D.R invited our attention to para-3 of the CIT(A)’s order and submitted that, though 18 opportunities were given, the assessee has not complied with the requirements of learned CIT(A) and hence, he supported the order of the learned CIT(A). Towards which, Ld. A.R submitted that during the proceedings before the present ld.CIT(A) on 19.03.2019, the authorized representative of the assessee submitted the details before the learned CIT(A) and the case was re-fixed for hearing on 29.08.2019. Thereafter, the learned CIT(A) posted the case for hearing on 30.10.2019. The ld. A.R. submitted that the learned CIT(A) passed the order on 01.11.2019 without giving any findings on the merits of the issue relating to the appeal. Therefore, the Ld. A.R. pleaded before us that the assessee was not given reasonable opportunity of being heard while disposing the appeal.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without giving effective opportunity to the assessee. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the order fo the learned CIT(A) for a fresh examination. The learned CIT(A) would give an effective opportunity of being beard to the assessee on the issue of belated filing of the appeal. In case, he

:-4-: condones the delay, the ld. CIT(A) would adjudicate the issues on merits. In case, he is not condoning the delay in filing the appeal, after giving effective opportunity, he shall pass a speaking order.

Thus, the corresponding grounds of appeal are allowed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced on 13th February, 2020 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 54G

All 49 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →