ELECTRONET EQUIPMENTS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 886/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 June 2024AY 2021-22Bench: DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for the limited purpose of adjudicating the additional ground of appeal raised by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2021-22. The primary issue was that the CIT(A) failed to adjudicate an additional ground of appeal raised by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated all grounds of appeal, including additional grounds, and whether a deduction under Section 43B for GST payment should be allowed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(1),Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE

Before: DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh Khandelwal – AR
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.CIT(DR)
Hearing: 20/06/2024Pronounced: 24/06/2024

ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], under section 250 of the Act dated 29.02.2024 for the A.Y.2021-22 emanating from the order u/sec.143(1) of the Act dated 24.08.2022. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per the provisions of the Act it be held that the appellate order passed by the CIT Appeals, ADDL/JCIT(A), Jodhpur is perverse, without considering the additional ground raised by the assessee company and without understanding the facts prevailing in the case and Electronet Equipments Private Limited [A] explanations given. It also be held that the appellate order passed is without following the rules of natural justice in as much as without taking the cognizance of additional ground raised and without drawing any inference on the same. The order passed be held to be null and void and not tenable in law. Just and proper relief be granted to the assessee.

2. Without prejudice to ground no. 1, on facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per the provisions and scheme of the Act it be held that the deduction u/s 43 B of the Act on account of GST payment amounting to Rs. 22,78,256/- made by the assessee company during the assessment year under consideration should be allowed. Just and proper relief be granted to the assessee.

3. The appellant prays to be allowed to add, amend, modify, rectify, delete, raise any grounds of appeal

at the time of hearing.”

2. Heard both the parties and perused the records. The ld.AR submitted that assessee had raised additional ground of appeal before ld.CIT(A), which was mentioned by the ld.CIT(A) on page 5 of the order. However, ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the additional ground raised by the assessee. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we set-aside the order of the ld.CIT(A)/JCIT(Appeal) to ld.CIT(A) for limited purpose of adjudicating the additional ground. Accordingly, ground no.1 of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

2.1 In these facts and circumstances of the case, Ground No.2 & 3 become academic in nature.

Electronet Equipments Private Limited [A]

3.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24th June, 2024.

More judgments on Section 43B

All 7,161 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →