Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SH. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SH. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.391/NAG/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13)
Nag Vidarbha Chamber of Income Tax Officer Commerce, Temple Road Ward-2(1) Civil Lines Vs. Nagpur Nagpur PAN:AAACN 9456C (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT)
Appellant by Sh. Rajesh V. Loya, CA Respondent by Sh. Vitthal M. Bhosle, Jt. CIT-DR Date of Hearing 08.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement 10.06.2022
ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 15/02/2017 for Assessment Year 2012-13.
The present Appeal has been filed after the laps of period of limitation, the Assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of the delay, the Ld. DR has no objection for condoning the delay. Therefore, delay in filing the present Appeal is condoned for the reasons stated in the Affidavit.
2 ITA No.391/Nag/2017 Nag Vidarbha Chamber of Commercevs. ITO
Brief facts of the case: The assessment order came to be passed on 28/08/2014 against the Assessee company by assessing the income of the Assessee at Rs.4,33,110/- as against the returned income of Rs.1,377/-. The Assessee has preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Nagpur. After filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee has not appeared before the Ld. CIT(A) even after issuing repeated notices and ultimately on 15.02.2017, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the Assessee.
Aggrieved by the Order dated 15/02/2017 passed by the CIT (A), the Assessee has preferred the present appeal on the following grounds. “(1.) That the orders of the learned CIT(A) -2, Nagpur and Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Nagpur are bad in law and wrong on facts. (2) That the learned AO erred in law and on facts in not computing the income of the assessee as per the provisions of Section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act when the assessee is a charitable organization registered U/s.l2A of the Income Tax Act and the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the same. On facts of the case, the action of the authorities is unjustified. 3) That the learned AO and the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee is a Section 25 company registered U/S.12A and eligible to carry out charitable activities and the surplus arising there-from is exempt as per the provisions of Section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act. On the facts of the case the order of learned authorities is wrong & liable to be set aside. (4) That the learned AO erred in law and on facts in not providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee to trace and reproduce its old certification of registration U/s,12A of the Income Tax Act. On facts of the case, the action of the AO in disregarding the various evidences provided during the assessment proceedings, in support of the registration U/s.l2A, is highly unjustified.
3 ITA No.391/Nag/2017 Nag Vidarbha Chamber of Commercevs. ITO
(5) That the learned AO erred in law and on facts in holding that the assessee company is not eligible to claim its income exempt under the Principle of Mutuality and considering the taxable income at Rs.4,33,110/- instead of Rs.1,377/- as per the return filed and the learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the ground raised before him in the appellate proceedings. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of authorities is unjustified. (6) That the learned CIT-(A) erred in law and on facts in not adjudicating the grounds of appeal on legality as well as merits. The order passed by the CIT(A) is unjustified and liable to be quashed. (7) That the learned Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts in determining and charging interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234D erred in not adjudicating the ground raised. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the calculation is improper. (8) That any other ground with kind permission of your honour at the time of hearing of appeal.” 5. During the course of hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee has fairly submitted that, the Assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and put forth his case effectively and sought an opportunity to the Assessee to address his grievances in the appeal proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) and sought for remanding the matter to the file of CIT (A). 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR has relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that there is no requirements of interference in the order of the Ld. CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties, perused the materials of record and gave our thoughtful consideration. It is not in dispute that the Assessee has not participate in the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) and Ld. CIT(A) has
4 ITA No.391/Nag/2017 Nag Vidarbha Chamber of Commercevs. ITO
passed the order of dismissal of the appeal without hearing the Assessee and without dealing the issues involved in the appeal in detail. By taking lenient view and in the interest of the justice, we deem it proper to set aside the order impugned by remanding the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. 8. Accordingly, we allow the grounds of appeal for statistical purpose with a direction to the Assessee to participate in the appeal proceedings before the CIT(A) without fail. The Ld. CIT(A) shall provide an opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
In result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 10th Day of June, 2022.
Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 10/06/2022 PK/Sps Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT 6. Guard File True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur