DDIT, CHENNAI vs. THE MADRAS ELECTRIC TRADES ASSOCIATION, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2195/CHNY/2014Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 July 2016AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering that the CIT(A) had allowed the appeal without addressing key issues like depreciation and capital gains, the Tribunal remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The Revenue's appeal was filed beyond the limitation period. The assessee society's activities were in the nature of general public utility, and the Assessing Officer had passed an ex-parte order. The CIT(A) had allowed the appeal fully without addressing certain issues.

What were the issues?

The primary issues involved the condonation of delay in filing the appeal and the proper adjudication of the assessee's taxability, including depreciation and capital gains, especially after an ex-parte order by the AO and a broad allowance by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 250(6),Section 2(15)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY

आदेश / O R D E R Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:-

1.

This appeal is filed by the Revenue aggrieved by the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- VII, Chennai in dated 10.03.2014 passed under section 144 r.w.s. 147 & 250(6) of the Act.

2.

The appeal filed by the Revenue was barred by limitation of 45 days. The Revenue has filed an affidavit explaining the reason that as the concerned 12AA folder got mixed up with the other files, consequent to which there was delay in obtaining administrative approval. It was further submitted that the delay in filing the appeal was neither wanton nor willful and therefore prayed for condonation of delay. Considering the submissions of the Revenue we are satisfied that there was reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. Therefore in the interest of justice, we hereby condone the delay in filing the appeal and admit the same for adjudication.

3.

The Revenue in its appeal has raised several elaborate and narrative grounds in regard to the activity of the assessee society which is in the nature of general public utility, applicability of the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act, distinction between the related business activity and unrelated business activity of the society, allowability of the claim of depreciation, imposition of capital gain tax etc.

4.

At the outset, we find that learned Assessing Officer has passed an ex-parte order due to non-representation.

Subsequently, on appeal, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has allowed the appeal fully without addressing the issue on the allowability of depreciation, taxability of capital gain etc. This Bench of the Tribunal in the case Anjuman E-Himayath-E-Islam in vide order dated 02.06.2015 has held the issue with respect to the allowability of depreciation against the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we hereby remit the entire matter back to the file of the learned Assessing Officer in order to provide an opportunity to the learned Assessing Officer as well as the assessee to examine all the facts and intricacies in the case afresh.

5.

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

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →