ASIAN HEALTH AND NUTRI FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITI, CIRCLE 1(1), SALEM
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBE & SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,‘बी’ �यायपीठ,चे�ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी मनु कुमार िग�र, �याियक सद�य एवं �ी एस. आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सद�य के सम� BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBE AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.: 971/Chny/2024 िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Asian Health and Nutri Foods v. Circle -1(1), Private Limited, Salem. No. 959/1a, K S Road, Sooravarikandigal, Sirupuzhalpettai (Post), Gummidippondi, Chennai, Thiruvallur – 601 201 [PAN:AADCA-6299-D] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ�क�ओरसे/Appellant by : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate ��यथ�क�ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri. D. HemaBhupal, JCIT सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 24.06.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 28.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal by the assessee is filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18, vide order dated 30.11.2023.
At the outset, it is noticed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 71 days. The impugned
:-2-: ITA. No:971/Chny/2024 order passed by the CIT(A) dated 30.11.2023 was served on the assessee on 30.11.2023. The appeal has to be filed on or before 29.01.2024 but it was actually filed on 08.04.2024 with a delay of 71 days. The assessee has filed affidavit along with condonation petition stating the reason that the order of CIT (A) got misplaced and the orders from the website were not available due to technical errors. The ld.CIT-DR did not seriously objected to condone the delay. We find the cause as reasonable and hence, condone the delay and admit the appeal.
The brief facts are that the assessee is a private limited company and e-filed its return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 31.10.2017 admitting a loss of Rs.46,91,999/-. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was served on 25.09.2018. The Assessing Officer concluded the assessment by passing the order U/s.143(3) of the Act on 27.12.2019 by making the additions as below taxable U/s.115BBE of the Act. 1. Cash sales as unexplained - Rs.10,57,07,149/- 2. Cash deposit during demonetisation Rs. 4,31,00,000/- 3. Sundry Creditors for goods Rs. 7,16,00,000/-
:-3-: ITA. No:971/Chny/2024 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) and subsequently filed petition U/s.264 before the Ld.PCIT -1, Coimbatore.
The Ld.PCIT has deleted the addition made in Sl.No. 2 – cash deposit and set aside the other two additions made Sl.No.1 & 3 for verification to AO, vide his order dated 13.01.2021.
The AO, after verification of submissions made by the Assessee passed an order U/s.143(3) r.w.s.264 on 31.03.2022 by reducing the addition to Rs.2,36,90,490/- on account of sundry creditors / trade advances and deleting the addition made an account of cash sales. Subsequently, the case was transferred to this office from National faceless penalty center with the approval of CBDT to complete the penalty proceedings. The Assessing officer passed an order of penalty on 26/09/2022 by levying penalty of Rs.1,25,62,940/- (200% of the Tax payable) U/s.270A of the Act, by rejecting the application filed by the assessee U/s.270AA, as the provisions of immunity to penalty is available only for the orders passed U/s.143(3) or 147 and not for the order passed consequent to order U/s.264 as stated in Section 270AA(1)(a) of the Act. Aggrieved by the
:-4-: ITA. No:971/Chny/2024 impugned penalty order U/s.270A of the Act, the Assessing preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT (A).
The ld.CIT(A) had issued seven notices granting opportunities to the assessee to appear for hearing. However, the assessee had not responded. The ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing an order dated 30.11.2023 by upholding the decision of levying penalty by the Assessing officer. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee is before us.
The ld.AR stated that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the assessee’s appeal exparte, is erroneous in law and prayed for remanding the matter back to the ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merit.
The ld.DR did not raise any objections for the same.
We have heard both the parties and gone through the order of the ld.CIT(A). It is noted that the ld.CIT(A) has passed the impugned order exparte. To meet the ends of justice, we remit back the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. We direct the assessee to appear before the ld.
:-5-: ITA. No:971/Chny/2024 CIT(A) and at liberty to submit the relevant details before the ld.CIT(A) for adjudication of the case.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th June, 2024 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एस.आर.रघुनाथा) (मनु कुमार िग�र) (S. R. RAGHUNATHA) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखासद�/Accountant Member �ाियकसद�/Judicial Member चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 28th June, 2024 JPV आदेशकी�ितिलिपअ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3.आयकर आयु�/CIT– Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF
