M/s Ram Bahadur Thakur Limited, Cochin v. ACIT, Ernakulam

ITA 934/COCH/2008 | 1996-2007
Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2010

Appeal Details

RSA Number 93421914 RSA 2008
Bench Cochin
Appeal Number ITA 934/COCH/2008
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
Appellant M/s Ram Bahadur Thakur Limited, Cochin
Respondent ACIT, Ernakulam
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 06-05-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 06-05-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 04-05-2010
Next Hearing Date 04-05-2010
Assessment Year 1996-2007
Appeal Filed On 14-11-2008
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH COCHIN BEFORE SHRI N.VIJAYAKUMARAN & SHRI SANJAY ARORA I.T.A.NO.934/COCH/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR:1996-97 M/S. RAM BAHADUR THAKUR LTD. COCHIN -3. PA NO.AABCR 22996 L VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-1(1) ERNAKULAM. (APPELLANT) ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY SHRI JOHN PRAKAS H RESPONDENT BY SHRI TJ VINCENT JR.DR O R D E R PER N.VIJAYAKUMARAN J.M: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-IV KOCHI DATED 10-11-20 06. THE ASSESSMENT YEAR INVOLVED IS 1996-97. 2. THE APPEAL IS DELAYED BY A PERIOD 556 DAYS AND F OR THAT A CONDONATION PETITION WITH AN AFFIDAVIT OF ONE D.D . SINGH ONE OF S.N.SINGH KADAVANTHRA KOCHI WHO IS THE CH IEF EXECUTIVE TAXATION & FINANCE OF THE ASSESSEE COMPA NY AND WHO IS CONVERSANT TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE DEPOSED THAT THE APPELLATE ORDER WAS RECEIVED ON 9-3-2007 AND IN PUR SUANCE OF A LONG PENDING LITIGATION BEFORE THE COMPANY LAW BOARD ITA NO. 934/COCH/2008 2 THE TEA ESTATES OF THE ASSESSEE IN PEERMADE HAD BEE N LOCKED OUT AND THE COMMERCIAL OFFICE AT WILLINGDON ISLAND WAS ALSO CLOSED AS THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS NOT IN A POSITI ON TO RETAIN ITS EMPLOYEES. THE PROVIDENT FUND AND TAX AUTHORITIES HAD ATTACHED THE PROPERTIES OF THEE ASS ESSEE WHICH WERE ALSO PUT UP FOR AUCTION. WHEN THE APPE LLATE ORDER WAS RECEIVED FROM THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE THE FEW STAFF IN THE COMMERCIAL OFFICE WAS NOT IN A POS ITION TO TAKE ANY ACTION ON THE SAME AS THEY WERE NEITHER QU ALIFIED NOR CONVERSANT WITH TAX MATTERS. ACCORDINGLY THE APPELLATE ORDER WAS LEFT UNATTENDED TO AND THE ASSESSEE WAS U NABLE TO FILE ANY FURTHER APPEAL AT THAT TIME. FURTHER IN VIEW OF THE PROHIBITORY ORDER OF THE COMPANY LAW BOARD THE ACC OUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY COULD NOT BE AUDITED AND WITHO UT SUCH AUDIT IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN FAVOURABLE ORDE RS FROM THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES. THIS IS THE REASON ATT RIBUTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE DELAY OF 556 DAYS. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS INCLUDIN G THAT OF THE JR. D.R. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT A REASONABLE CAUSE WHICH PREVENTED THE ASSESSEE FROM FILING THE APPEAL HAS BEEN SUBSTANTIATED AND FOUND TO BE A SUFFICIENT CAU SE. THEREFORE TAKING A PRAGMATIC VIEW AS LAID DOWN BY THE ITA NO. 934/COCH/2008 3 HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION VS. MST KATJI 167 ITR 471 WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL. 4. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS MAINLY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CULTIVATION AND MANUFACTURE OF TEA AND ALSO IN TRADING ACTIVITIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT REPORTS FILED ALONGWITH THE RETURN OF INCOME W AS PREPARED ONLY ON THE BASIS OF UNAUDITED PROVISIONAL ACCOUNTS. IT WAS STATED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFI CER THAT THE STATUTORY AUDIT WAS NOT COMPLETED BY M/S. THAKU R VAIDYANATH AIYAR & CO. C.AS. MUMBAI IN PURSUANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT AND THEREFORE THE R EPORT WAS PREPARED BASED ON THE UNAUDITED PROVISIONAL PRO FIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND BALANCE SHEET. THE SAME PROFIT A ND LOSS ACCOUNT AND BALANCE-SHEET WAS NOT APPROVED BY THE B OARD OF DIRECTORS. SUCH BEING THE SITUATION THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER WAS UNABLE TO ACCEPT THE BOOK RESULTS AND ACCORDING LY ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON NO PROFIT/LOSS BASIS. THE TOTAL INCOME WAS TAKEN AS NIL. 5. IT WAS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THROUGH OU T THE PROCEEDINGS INCLUDING BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) THAT THE FACTS ITA NO. 934/COCH/2008 4 AND CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE ASSESSEE COMPANY COULD NOT GET THE ACCOUNTS AUDITED OR TO SUBMIT THE AUDIT ED ACCOUNTS WAS NOT DULY CONSIDERED BY THE AUTHORITIES . 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS THE CONTE NTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT NOW THE COMPANY LAW BOARD NEW DE LHI PERMITTED THE FINALIZATION OF ACCOUNTS BY ITS ORDER DATED 11- 4-2007 AND ACCORDINGLY THE ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN DULY AUDITED. IT IS THE PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE THAT TH IS MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS HA S BEEN DONE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99 ON THE SAME S ET OF FACTS WHICH ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1073/C OCH/2004 DATED 24-10-2008 HEAVILY RELIED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER THE LD. D.R. RELIED ON THE ORD ERS OF THE AUTHORITIES. THAT BEING SO IN THE INTEREST OF NATU RAL JUSTICE WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AN D REMIT THIS ISSUE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR PROPER ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO AFFORD SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL FURNISH THE COPY OF A UDITED PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND BALANCE-SHEET BEFORE TH E ASSESSING OFFICER SO AS TO ENABLE HIM TO FINALIZE T HE ITA NO. 934/COCH/2008 5 ASSESSMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. SINCE THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR IS 1996-97 THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED NOT TO MA KE ANY UN-NECESSARY DELAY NOR DRAG THE PROCEEDINGS. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY ARORA) (N.VIJAYKUMARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL M EMBER ERNAKULAM DATED THE 06 TH MAY 2010. PM. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. RAM BAHADUR THAKUR LTD. SIDHARTH BUILDING WILLINGDON ISLAND COCHIN -3. 2. THE ACIT CIRCLE-1(1) ERNAKULAM. 3. CIT(A)-IV KOCHI. 4. CIT KOCHI. 5. D.R. BY ORDER SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR