ABT LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

आदेश / O R D E R

PER D.S.SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the Order dated 29.02.2016 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Coimbatore, in for the AY 2007-08.

2.0 The assessee filed return of income admitting total income of Rs.NIL on 02.11.2007. Subsequently, the assessment was re-opened by issuing

ITA No.1602/Mds/2016 :- 2 -: notice u/s 148 on 29.03.2012. Re-assessment was completed on total income of Rs.94,59,282/- under normal provisions and Rs.12,03,55,393/- u/s.115JB of Income Tax Act. Against the Order of the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

(hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.CIT(A)’) and the Ld.CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal. The assessee is in appeal against the Order of the Ld.CIT(A) before this Tribunal.

3.0 The assessee raised total 13 grounds in this appeal relating to non- adjudicating the grounds raised before the Ld.CIT(A) with regard to validity of re-assessment, the time limit for passing the re-assessment Order and other conditions in respect of disallowance u/s.14A r.w. Rule 8D of Income Tax Act, disallowance of expenses relating to leasehold premises and depreciation, etc.

4.0 During the appeal, the Learned Authorized Representative (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.AR’) argued that the assessee challenged the issue regarding the validity of re-assessment made u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) before the CIT(A) but the Ld.CIT(A) has passed the orders without adjudicating the ground raised in the appeal. The Ld.A.R further argued that the Assessing Officer (in short ‘AO’) has not followed the procedure laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer and Others reported in 259 ITR 19.

Therefore, the Ld.AR contended that the case should go back to the file of ITA No.1602/Mds/2016 :- 3 -: the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the issue regarding validity of re-assessment claimed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of Income Tax Act. On the other hand, the Learned Departmental Representative (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.DR’) relied on the Order of the lower authorities.

5.0 We heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed before us.

First we take up the issue relating to validity of re-assessment raised before the Ld.CIT(A) but not adjudicated upon by the Ld.CIT(A). It is seen from the grounds of the appeal filed before the Ld.CIT(A) that the assessee raised the issue regarding the jurisdiction of re-assessment made u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of Income Tax Act.

The assessee has raised the objections for not following the procedure laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer and Others reported in 259 ITR 19 (cited supra). The Ld.CIT(A) has not considered and adjudicate the grounds relating to the validity of re-assessment and the jurisdiction.

Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the case should be remitted back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the ground raised by the assessee regarding the re-opening of assessment. Accordingly, the Order of the Ld.CIT(A) is set-aside and the issue is remitted back to the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the issue relating to the re-opening of assessment and decide the issue afresh on merits.

ITA No.1602/Mds/2016 :- 4 -:

6.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.