Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI ]
Before: SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S.
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 31/05/2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to (NFAC), Delhi- for assessment year 2017-18.
BENGAL & ASSAM CO. LTD. VS. DCIT
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
“ 1. That the CIT(A) (NFAC) erred in dismissing the appeal filed under Acknowledgment No. 275482481211219 against assessment order dated 28.11.2019 for A.Y.2017-18 passed in the case of a company, namely, Florence Investech Ltd. by the Appellant Company as successor of above named company pursuant to merger of the same w.e.f. 01.04.2017 with the Appellant Company by wrongly referring to the declaration filed by the Appellant Company in Form No.1 under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and certificates issued in Form No.3 and Form No.5 by Pr.CIT- 1, New Delhi in the respect of different appeal filed by the Appellant Company, which appeal (CIT(A), Chennai- 1/10152/2019-20) was also dismissed by CIT(A) (NFAC) vide a separate order dated 07.04.2022.
2. That the CIT(A) erred in passing the impugned order dismissing the appeal giving reference to certificates issued by Pr. CIT without looking into the facts and grounds of the appeal. He ought to have looked into the facts on the basis of which it was evident that the appeal under reference was relating to different grounds / issues.
3. That the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on the wrong presumption that declaration has been filed under VSV Scheme ignoring the written submissions duly submitted by the Appellant Company under Ack. No 579070601040422 on 04.04.2022 in response to his notice for hearing dated 01.04.2022. He ought to have checked data on the website before passing the order dismissing the appeal.
4. That CIT(A) ought to have looked into the written submissions filed by the Appellant Company in respect of the appeal and ought to have decided the appeal on merits considering the grounds taken in appeal and submissions made vide written submissions.
BENGAL & ASSAM CO. LTD. VS. DCIT
5. That the CIT(A) ought to have held that order passed by the Assessing Officer was in the name of non-existent Company, namely, Florence Investech Ltd. and therefore, same was not sustainable under law.
6. That the CIT(A) ought to have deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.21,70,000/- u/s 14A read with Rule 8D without recording the proper satisfaction and also without appreciating the facts of the case.
7. That the CIT(A) also erred in not directing the Assessing Officer to allow MAT Credit as was available to the company as per law.”
Brief facts of the case are that, the assessment order came to be passed for Assessment Year 2017-18 on 28/11/2019 by making certain additions against the assessee. Assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT (A) and the Ld.CIT (A) dismissed the Appeal filed by the assessee on the ground that the assessee had opted for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the appeal, the assessee preferred the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above.
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had not opted for VSV as observed by the CIT(A) for the year under consideration. The CIT(A) while dismissing the Appeal considered the Form No. 3 & 5 issued by the Principal CIT, New Delhi in respect of different appeal filed by the assessee Company which has also been dismissed by CIT(A) (NFAC) vide separate order dated 07/04/2022, therefore submitted that, the issue involved in the appeal
BENGAL & ASSAM CO. LTD. VS. DCIT deserves to be adjudicated by restoring to the file of CIT(A) by allowing the Appeal.
The Ld. DR has not disputed the above facts and requested to restore the issue involved in the Appeal to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication on merit.
Considering the submissions made by both the parties and also considering the fact that the assessee had not opted for VSV for the year under consideration, the issue involved in the Appeal before the CIT(A) deserves to be decided on merit. Therefore, we set aside the order impugned and remit the matter to the file of CIT(A) with a direction to decide on merit after hearing the Assessee.
In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on : 31/05/2023.