M/s. Siechem Technologies P Ltd.,, CHENNAI v. ITO,, CHENNAI

ITA 699/CHNY/2012 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2012 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 69921714 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN AAGCS0703F
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 699/CHNY/2012
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
Appellant M/s. Siechem Technologies P Ltd.,, CHENNAI
Respondent ITO,, CHENNAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-07-2012
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 31-07-2012
Date Of Final Hearing 30-07-2012
Next Hearing Date 30-07-2012
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 03-04-2012
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : CHENNAI [BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER] I.T.A.NO.699/MDS/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 M/S SIECHEM TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD 26/27 ERRABALU CHETTY STREET CHENNAI 600 001 VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER COMPANY WARD VI(1) CHENNAI [PAN AAGCS0703F] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.BALASUBRAMANIAN ADVOCATE TAX CONSULTANT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 30-07-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31-07-2012 O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-V CHENNAI DATED 27.01.2012. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF A PPEAL: 1.1 THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IS INCORRECT. 1.2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT IS N OT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL AND HENCE ERRED I N DISMISSING THE APPEAL. I.T.A.NO.699/12 :- 2 -: 1.3 NON APPEARANCE BEFORE CIT (A) ON SOME OF THE EARLIER OCCASIONS HAS HAPPENED BEYOND THE CONTROL O F THE APPELLANT AND COPY OF AFFIDAVIT BY THE CA. FIL ED WITH FORM 36 FOR AY 2007-08 ENCLOSED HERETO EXPLAINS THE REASONS FOR THE DEFAULT AND APPELLANT REGRETS VERY MUCH FOR THE SAME. 1.4 SINCE THE NON APPEARANCE WAS NOT WANTON AND SINCE IT HAD HAPPENED BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE APPELLANT THE HON'BLE CIT(A)ERRED IN DECIDING TH E APPEAL EXPARTE. 2. AUTHORITIES BELOW ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING CLAIM O F DEDUCTION U/S 80LB TO THE TUNE OF RS.12 47 157 CLAI MED BY APPELLANT. 3. AUTHORITIES BELOW ERRED IN DISALLOWING RS.1 52 464 BEING 25% OF BUSINESS PROMOTION EXPENSES OF RS.6 09 856 ON ESTIMATE BASIS. 4. THE LEARNED A/O ERRED IN DISALLOWING RS.44 208 & 1 44 000 UNDER SEC.40(A)(IA) WITHOUT APPLYING THE AMENDMENT TO THAT SECTION WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 1-4-2005 FOR THE REASONS STATED ABOVE AND THOSE THAT MAY BE ADDUCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT HON'BLE ITAT MAY BE PLEASED TO RESTORE THE APPEAL T O THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) 3. THE A.R OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS POSTED THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON THE FOLLOWING DATE S: 01-08-2011 22-11-2011 02-12-2011 16-12-2011 & 05-01-2012 I.T.A.NO.699/12 :- 3 -: 4. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR ON THOSE DATES AND THEREFORE THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER MAKING THE ADDITIONS IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 5. THE A.R SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI G. ANANTHAN FCA EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO APPEAR ON THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING BY THE CIT(A). HE SUBM ITTED THAT CONSIDERING THE AFFIDAVIT THE LAPSE ON THE PART O F THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING BE CONDONED AS THE NON-APPEARANCE WAS NOT FOR MALAFIDE REASONS BUT FOR BONAFIDE REASONS AND THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) THEREBY GRANTING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE CIT(A). HE MADE A ST ATEMENT AT THE BAR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A GOOD CASE AND HAS ALL RELE VANT MATERIALS AND UNDERTAKES TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) TO PRODUCE T HE SAME AS AND WHEN CALLED UPON TO DO SO. 6. THE DR DID NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO RESTORING THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) F OR RE-ADJUDICATION OF THE SAME AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND THE AFF IDAVIT OF SHRI G. ANANTHAN FCA WE FIND THAT THERE WAS A REA SONABLE CAUSE FOR THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A) O N THE DATES FIXED I.T.A.NO.699/12 :- 4 -: FOR HEARING. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ON E MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE FOR REPRESENTING ITS CASE BEFORE THE CIT(A). WE THERE FORE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND REMAND THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL BACK TO HIS FILE FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BOTH THE PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FILE ALL THE MATERIALS BEFORE THE CIT(A ) AS AND WHEN CALLED UPON TO DO SO. HENCE THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON TUESDAY THE 31 ST OF JULY 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER (N.S.SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31 ST JULY 2012 RD COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR