Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ �यायपीठ,चे�ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी महावीर �सह, उपा�य� एवं �ी मनोज कुमार अ�वाल, लेखा सद�य के सम� BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1271 & 1272/CHNY/2023 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Aston Power & Steel Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.27B, Mooker Nallamuthu Street, Vs. Corporate Ward-1(1), Parrys, Chennai. Chennai – 600 001. PAN: AAICA 4259Q (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/Appellant by : Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami, Advocate for Shri D. Anand, Advocate ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT सुनवाई क� तारीख/Date of Hearing : 02.07.2024 घोषणा क� तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 02.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT: These appeals by the assessee are arising out of the different orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056019949(1) & 1056020971(1) both dated 13.09.2023. The assessments were framed by the Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 1(1), Chennai for the assessment years 2012-13 & 2013-14 u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 &
- 2 - ITA Nos.1271 & 1272/CHNY/2024 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) vide orders dated 24.11.2017 & 22.03.2016 respectively.
At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee drew our attention to ITA No.1271/CHNY/2023 for assessment year 2012- 13 and took us through the order of CIT(A)-NFAC and gone through para 4 at page 4. The ld.counsel stated that the CIT(A)-NFAC has not at all adjudicated the issue on merits and this order of CIT(A)- NFAC is ex-parte. The ld.counsel stated that she is seeking relief only that matter be restored back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the issue after hearing the assessee and by passing a speaking order. To this, the ld.Senior DR could not object.
After hearing rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case, we noted that there is no adjudication by CIT(A)-NFAC on merits as we have gone through para 4 of the appellate order at page 4. It is also clear that the CIT(A)-NFAC has not adjudicated the issue after hearing the assessee rather this appeal is dismissed without providing opportunity of being heard. Hence, we set aside the order of CIT(A)-NFAC and remand the
- 3 - ITA Nos.1271 & 1272/CHNY/2024 matter back to his file for fresh adjudication for allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Coming to ITA No.1272/CHNY/2023, the ld.counsel for the assessee drew our attention to Ground Nos.2 & 3, which read as under:- 2. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in dismissing the appellants due to technical reason that the verification of appeal is not in accordance with Income Tax Rules appeal as prescribed under Rule 45(2) which requires the that verification of appeal in the appeal form is to be done by the Managing Director of the company. 3. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) ought to have seen that when the appeal was filed no defect notice was issued to the appellant and that the appellant was unaware of the defect alleged in the impugned order. Even at the stage of Adjudicating the appeal no show cause notice was issued to the appellant for dismissing the appeal on technical grounds by invoking section 140(c) of the Income Tax Act. The said decision is in utter violation of provision of law and principles of natural justice.
The ld.counsel also took us through the order of CIT(A)-NFAC, para 4 at page 8 and stated that the order of CIT(A)-NFAC is not all speaking and there is no adjudication on merits except few lines. The ld.counsel drew our attention to para 4 of the CIT(A)-NFAC order. The ld.counsel stated that the CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeal for technical reason that verification of appeal is not in accordance with Rule 45(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.
When these facts were confronted, the ld.Senior DR could not point out any contrary argument.
- 4 - ITA Nos.1271 & 1272/CHNY/2024 6. After hearing rival contentions and going through the facts of the case, we find that the order of CIT(A)-NFAC is totally non- speaking and also dismissed the appeal for technical reason that verification is not proper. Therefore, we set aside the order of CIT(A)-NFAC and direct him to allow one more opportunity to the assessee to rectify the technical defect and thereafter hear the appeal on merits and pass a speaking order on merits.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on 2nd July, 2024 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (महावीर �सह ) (मनोज कुमार अ�वाल) (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 2nd July, 2024 RSR आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु� /CIT, Chennai 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF.