Loading judgment…
Facts
RCI Industries & Technologies Ltd. appealed against a CIT(A) order for AY 2001-02, which originated from an assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. During the tribunal's hearing, it was revealed that the assessee company was undergoing Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) proceedings, and a moratorium order had been passed by NCLT. Furthermore, the revenue confirmed that it was not pressing its demand for the relevant assessment year in the IBC proceedings.
Held
The tribunal, noting the assessee's non-appearance and the ongoing IBC proceedings where the revenue was not pursuing its claim for the assessment year 2001-02, concluded that the appeal had become infructuous. Given these circumstances, the tribunal found that the appeal was left without any consequences to flow.
Key Issues
Whether an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal becomes infructuous and should be dismissed when the assessee company is undergoing IBC proceedings and the revenue department is not pressing its demand for the relevant assessment year.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA
Assessment Year: 2001-02 RCI Industries & Technologies Ltd., Vs DCIT, B-97, All Heavens Building, Circle-19(1), Wazirpur Industrial Area, New Delhi.. Wazirpur, Delhi – 110 052. PAN: AAACR5727Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 25.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 25.11.2024 ORDER
PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 28.08.2020 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Delhi-38 (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in Appeal No.CIT(A), Delhi-38/10440/2018-19 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 31.03.2004 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO).
None appeared for the assessee when the case was called for hearing and the notices have been issued for today through RPAD and report is received, that the has left the given address. Ld. DR was heard.
On perusal of the record, we find that on 09.04.2024, the following order was made:- “Ld. R.P. submits that the assessee company is under IBC proceedings. No claim has been received on behalf of the Revenue regarding A.Y. 2001-02. We have heard Ld. R.P. The Revenue is granted liberty for approaching the R.P. for making its claim before NCLT in accordance with Law. Appeal is adjourned sine die.”
Thereafter, appeal has been again listed for hearing and notice issued. We find that there is an order dated 25.11.2022 by NCLT Delhi Bench in IB- 2688/ND/2019 on record wherein moratorium order has been passed.
We have gone through the grounds of appeal and the impugned orders. In the absence of any representation, from the RP and considering the fact that admittedly revenue is not pressing the demand for relevant FY in IBC proceedings, the appeal is not left with any consequences to flow and dismissed, being infructuous.