Sharon Solutions Ltd., CHENNAI v. DCIT company circle-6(2), CHENNAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI . . . $ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.JAYARAMAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1894/CHNY/2019 % % /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 M/S.SHARON SOLUTIONS LTD . A 15-18 PIPDIC ELECTRONICS PARK THIRUBHUVANAI PONDICHERRY 605 107. VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE-6(1) CHENNAI-34. [ PAN: AAFCS 8729 J ] ( ( /APPELLANT) ( )*( /RESPONDENT) ( + / APPELLANT BY : NONE )*( + /RESPONDENT BY : MR.P.MUTHUSHANKAR J. C.I.T D.R + /DATE OF HEARING : 01.10.2019 + /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.11.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-15 CHENNAI D ATED 29.03.2019 AND PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THERE WAS A DELAY OF 22 DAYS IN FILING OF APPE AL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A PETITION FOR CO NDONATION OF DELAY. WE ITA NO.1894/CHNY/2019 :- 2 -: HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR. WE FIND THAT THERE WAS SUFF ICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME. THER EFORE WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL. 3. NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE APPEAL WA S TAKEN UP FOR HEARING EVEN THOUGH NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD. THE REGISTRY HAS PLACED ON RE CORD THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AS A PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE ON THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE WE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTA TIVE AND PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT. 4. NOW COMING TO THE MERIT OF THE APPEAL. THE LE ARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE MR.P.MUTHUSHANKAR SUBM ITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED AN EXPENDITURE TO AN E XTENT OF RS.5.04 79 675/- U/S.40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT FOR NON-D EDUCTION OF TDS. IN GROUND NO.3 THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT TAX WAS DEDUC TED AND PAID TO THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT WHICH WAS DISCLOSED IN THE TAX AUDIT REPORT. THEREFORE THIS NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED. 5. HAVING HEARD THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESEN TATIVE THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE FACT WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS DEDUCTED TAX AS CLAIMED IN GROUND NO.3 OF GROUN DS OF APPEAL NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED. BESIDES THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO.3 IT ALSO NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED FORM NO.10C CB FOR CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S.80-IB OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE CLAIM S THAT FILING OF FORM NO.10CCB IS ONLY A CURABLE DEFECT. SINCE THE FACTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE ON ITA NO.1894/CHNY/2019 :- 3 -: RECORD THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE MATTER IS TO BE RE-EXAMINED. ACCORDINGLY THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE AU THORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE I S REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICE R SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER AFRESH AND BRING ON RECORD WHETHER THE ASSES SEE HAS DEDUCTED THE TAX AS CLAIMED AND PAID TO THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT. IT ALSO NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED FORM NO.10CCB FOR CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S.80-IB OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER THE ASSESSING OFF ICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF MATERIAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 8 TH NOVEMBER 2019 IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI 1 /DATED: 8 TH NOVEMBER 2019. K S SUNDARAM + )23 43 /COPY TO: 1. ( /APPELLANT 4. 5 /CIT 2. )*( /RESPONDENT 5. 3 ) /DR 3. 5 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. % /GF