M/S. SENCO GOLD LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2101/KOL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 January 2020AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's technical argument regarding the violation of Section 251(1)(a) of the Act, as the CIT(A)'s power to 'set aside' issues back to the Assessing Officer was removed. The Tribunal restored the issues of MAT, TDS, and advance tax credit back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns assessment year 2014-15, arising from an order passed under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The core issues revolve around the validity of the assessment and the CIT(A)'s order, particularly concerning MAT credit, TDS, and advance tax credit.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the validity of the assessment proceedings under Section 153A and whether the CIT(A) correctly remanded the matters of MAT credit, TDS, and advance tax credit back to the Assessing Officer, considering the amendment to Section 251(1)(a).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A,Section 143(3),Section 251(1)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “A” KOLKATA

Before: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S.Godara, Judicial Member:- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21 Kolkata’s order dated 04.07.2019 passed in case No. 10566/CC-4(1)/CIT(A)-21/kol/2018-19, AY 2013-14 10567/CC-4(1)/CIT(A)-21/kol/2018-19, AY 2014-15, involving proceedings 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’.

2.

The assessee raised the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal:-

1.

M/s Senco Gold Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), Kol. Page 2 “1. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the appellate order passed was in violation of principals of natural justice hence is bad in law and be quashed.

2. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment made u/s 153A of the IT Act 1961 was bad in law and hence the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) based on the assessment order is bad in law and be quashed.

3.

For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment made u/s 153A of the IT Act 1961 was without any satisfaction of the relevant Assessing officer hence the proceedings were bad in law and hence the order be quashed.

4. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the additions/ disallowances made u/s 153A of the IT Act 1961 was beyond the scope of the said section and hence bad in law and hence the order be quashed and/ or the addition/ disallowances be deleted.

5.

For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the additions/ disallowances made u/s 153A of the IT Act 1961 was not based on any incriminating documents / material/ evidences found in the search which and hence the additions / disallowance made were beyond the scope of the said .section hence the appellate order passed by the Ld CIT(A) based on the assessment order is bad in law and be quashed and/or the addition/ disallowances be deleted.

6.

For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment had abetted and hence the additions / disallowances made u/s 153A of the IT Act 1961 was beyond the scope of the said section and hence the appellate order passed by the Ld CIT(A) based on the assessment order is bad in law and be quashed and/or the addition / disallowances be deleted.

7.

For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Assessing Officer be directed to grant full MAT credit claimed at the time of filing of return of income amounting to Rs.3,13,90,196 as claimed in the return of income.

8.

For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Assessing Officer be directed to grant credit of the Advance Tax paid by Ms Senco Impex Private Limited, PAN AAKCA3397B, which was merged with the assessee company w.e.f. 01/04/2013 by the order of the Calcutta High Court in CP No 51-2014.

9.

For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Assessing Officer be directed to grant credit of the TDS in the hands of Ms Senco Impex Private Limited, PAN AAKCA3397B, which was merged with the assessee company w.e.f. 01/04/2013 by the order of the Calcutta High Court in CP No 51-2014.

M/s Senco Gold Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), Kol. Page 3 10. For the Learned Assessing Officer be directed to recompute the tax and interest after giving effect to the above grounds 11. For that the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the interest u/s 234 A/B/C the same was unjustified and hence the same be recalculated as per the applicable law.

12.

The appellant craves leave to produce additional evidences in terms of Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules 1963.

3. Learned authorized representative invites our attention to the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion at page 10 para-9 of the CIT(A)’s order directing the Assessing Officer to give MAT, TDS and advance tax credit to the assessee. His case accordingly is that although the assessee had placed on record all the corresponding details of the corresponding merger scheme approved by hon'ble jurisdictional high court in Company Petition No. 51 of 2014 with effect from 01.04.2013, the CIT(A) has restored the instant issues back to the Assessing Officer in violation of sec.251(1)(a) wherein the legislature has taken away “or he may set aside” i.e. remand jurisdiction with effect from 01.06.2001. Learned counsel submitted that the assessee had placed on record all the relevant details of the impugned MAT, TDS and advance tax credit allowable as per law which ought to have been accepted in lower appellate proceedings only. The Revenue pleads strong reliance on the CIT(A) findings under challenge.

4.

After giving our thoughtful to rival pleadings, we find merit in respect to the assessee’s technical argument alleging violation of sec. 251(1)(a) of the Act since the CIT(A)’s jurisdiction to ‘set aside the issue’ back to the Assessing Officer has been taken away w.e.f. 01.06.2001. The fact also remains that the Assessing Officer’s assessment order dated 31.12.2018 has nowhere examined the issue in details qua the instant three issues of TDS MAT and advance tax credit as the above stated merger scheme appeared in himself jurisdictional high court. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the Assessing Officer is yet to examine the instant issue. We therefore restore the M/s Senco Gold Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), Kol. Page 4 assessee’s above sole grievance back to the Assessing Officer ourselves for afresh adjudication as per law within three effective opportunities of hearing. The assessee is directed to appear in consequential proceedings on or before 30.06.2020 alongwith a copy of the instant order.

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →