DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI vs. CITADEL FINE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 125/CHNY/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 September 2018AY 2008-094 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that it has the power to remit matters back to the AO with directions. Following a previous order for AY 2010-11, the Tribunal remitted both appeals back to the AO for verification and allowance of bad debt deductions.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order directing the AO to verify and allow deduction for bad debts written off to the extent of amounts offered for taxation in earlier years. The assessee is a pharmaceutical company that filed returns for AY 2008-09 and 2009-10.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) has the power to remit an appeal back to the AO with directions. The allowability of bad debt deductions based on amounts offered to tax in earlier years.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 251,Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY

Hearing: 04.09.2018

आदेश / O R D E R

Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:-

1.

These appeals by the Revenue are directed against the orders passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai, both dated 31.10.2017 in & 79/CIT(A)-1/2011-12 passed U/s.250(6) r.w.s. 143(3) r.w.s.147 & 143 of the Act for the assessment years 2008-09 & 2009-10 respectively.

2 & 126/Chny/2018 2. The Revenue has raised three identical grounds in its appeals however the crux of the issue is that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in directing the Ld.AO to verify the records and allow the deduction of bad debts written off to the extent of amount offered for taxation in the earlier years which is nothing but remitting back the appeal to the file of Ld.AO and it is not permissible under the provisions of Section 251 of the Act.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing pharmaceutical products, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2008-09 & 2009-10 electronically on 27.09.2008 & 30.09.2009 admitting loss of Rs.1,21,89,114/- for the assessment year 2008-09 and income of Rs.29,04,120/- under normal provisions and Rs.2,61,40,681/- under MAT provisions for the assessment year 2009-10. Thereafter assessment was completed U/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act for the assessment year 2008-09 and U/s.143(3) of the Act for the assessment year 2009-10 wherein the Ld.AO made certain additions.

3 & 126/Chny/2018 4. On appeal, for both the assessment years the Ld.CIT(A) directed the Ld.AO to verify the records and allow deduction of bad debts written off to the extent of the amount offered to tax in the earlier years by following the order of the Tribunal for the assessment year 2010-11 in the assessee’s own case.

5.

The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A) because they are of the view that the Ld.CIT(A) do not have powers under the provisions of the Act for remitting back the appeal to the file to the Ld.AO with directions, by virtue of Section 251 of the Act.

6.

At the outset we find that the Tribunal does not have any restriction to remit the matter back to the file of Ld.AO with directions. Therefore keeping view of the facts of the case and the order of the Tribunal for the assessment year 2010-11 in the assessee’s own case, we hereby remit both the appeals back to the file of Ld.AO with directions to verify the records of the assessee and allow deduction towards bad debts written off in the books of accounts of the assessee to the extent of the amount offered to tax in earlier years. It is ordered accordingly.

Order pronounced on the 04th September, 2018 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 251

All 1,124 judgments and leading authorities on Section 251 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →