Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed for Assessment Year 2012-13 against a CIT(A) order which confirmed a CPC processing order issued under Section 143(1), specifically challenging a Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) liability of Rs.3,16,013/-. The assessee argued the order lacked valid jurisdiction, was time-barred, and violated principles of natural justice. During the hearing, the counsel focused solely on the DDT liability challenge.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's denial of Dividend Distribution Tax liability in principle. Consequently, it decided to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh factual verification and adjudication. The Assessing Officer is directed to provide the assessee with three effective opportunities of hearing.
Key Issues
Validity of Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) liability confirmed by CIT(A) under Section 143(1), questioned on grounds of jurisdiction, limitation, and denial of natural justice.
Sections Cited
143(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dated 01.07.2024 in case No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/106300353(1) in proceedings u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”).
Heard both parties at length. Case files perused.
The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal:
“1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. DDIT CPC in passing the impugned order u/s 143(1) without assuming valid jurisdiction as per law and the impugned order is barred by limitation inter-alia for the reason that the impugned order u/s 143(1) dated 15-07-2013 has been served on 24-11- 2023.
2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. DDIT CPC in computing the dividend distribution tax liability of Rs.3,16,013/- and that too without any basis, material and evidence and by recording incorrect facts and findings and in violation of principles of natural justice.
3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing the impugned order and that too without providing the opportunity of being heard and in violation of principles of natural justice.”
Learned counsel’s submission, during the course of hearing that the assessee presses for only its second substantive ground challenging Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) liability of Rs.3,16,013/- made in the CPC’s processing dated 15.07.2017 as upheld in the lower appellate findings. Learned counsel invites the undersigned’s attention to the assessee’s paper book running into 56 pages comprising of its acknowledgment of return for A.Y. 2012-13, income tax return, audited financial statement, written submission etc. to buttress the point that it is not liable to pay for any such Dividend Distribution Tax.
That being the case, I find merit in the learned departmental representative submissions that given the fact that the assessee is denying its Dividend Distribution Tax liability in principle, the matter be restored to the Assessing Officer for his afresh factual verification and adjudication within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly.