Ita/157/2020 Of M/S. Swetha Realmart Llp v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURUDATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 27072 PRESENT| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD 1LT.A. NO.157 OF 2020 BEITWEEN M/S. SWETHA REALMART LLP(SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST OFM/S. SWETHA HEALTH RESEARCH PVT. LTD.)NO.7, SAMYAKT UTTARADHI MUTT ROADNEAR NATIONAL COLLEGESHANKARAPURAM, BENGALURU-560004 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER|MR. A.V. DHARNESH KUMAR|AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS|S/O LATE A.N. VAJRANABHAIAH.— APPELLANT| (BY SRI. CHYTHANYA K.K. ADV.) AND THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX)CIRCLE-6(1)(2), BMTC BUILDINGSO FI. ROAD, 6TH BLOCKNEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE.KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095. | .. RESPONDENT| (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) THIS I.T.A. IS. FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OFI.T.ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO:I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAWSTATED ABOVE. I]. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE IMPUGNEDORDER|OF|THE|INCOMETA®XAPPELLATETRIBUNAL, BENGALURU‘CcBENCHBEARINGINITANO.2435/BANG/2019DATED29/05/2020FOR|THE|ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 AS ENCLOSED IN ANNEXURE-A|& ETC, THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,ALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short).has been preferred by the assessee. The subject matter|of the appeal pertains to the Assessment Year 2016-17. The appeal whicn was admitted py this Court to consider.the following substantial questions of law: Whether, in the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal ts right in law indismissing the Appeal instead of disposingthe matter on merits. 2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal brieflystated are that the assessee filed return of income by.declaring.income.ofRs.15,64,59,600/-_for.theAssessment Year 2016-17. Tne order of assessment|was passed under Section 143(3) of the Act by theAssessing Officer on 21.12.2018. The assessee|thereafter filed an appeal before the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals), who, by an order dated30.09.2019, dismissed the appeal preferred by theassessee. [he assessee thereupon approached theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal by filing an appeal. The|tribunal, Dy an order dated 29.05.2020, dismissed theappealInter aliaon the ground that in the absence ofdocumentary evidence in support of assessees claim.that the property sold in question was not depreciableasset, no ground is made out to interfere with the orderpassed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). | In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal Nas|been filed. — 3 Learned counsel for the assessee submitted thatthe assessee had engaged a senior chartered accountantand the tribunal had directed the assessee to file the|documentpertainingCOauditedaccountsand.computation of income. However, the senior charteredaccountant could not apprenend the same and could notcomply with the directions issued by the tribunal. Thetribunal, however, instead of examining the matter on|merits, dismissed the appeal without adjudicating the|issue on merits. It is further submitted that in case the.matter is remitted to the tribunal, tne assesseeundertakestO.Tile|theauditeddocuments|and|computation of income before the tribunal within aperiod of four weeks from the date of receipt of certifiedcopy of the order passed today. On the other nand,learned counsel for the revenue Nas opposed the prayer. 4. We have considered the submissions made bythe learned counsel for the parties. It is trite law thatfor the fault committed by a counsel, a party should notDe|penalized.IT|apped[stnat|Of)accountOT inadvertence, the senior chartered accountant engaged|by the assessee could not comply with the directions ofthe Tribunal to file the documents. The tribunal, infact,snould have adjudicated the matter on merits instead ofsummarily dismissing the same. 5. In view of preceding analysis, the substantialquestion of law framed by this Court is answered in.favour of the assessee and against the revenue. — 4. We have considered the submissions made bythe learned counsel for the parties. It is trite law thatfor the fault committed by a counsel, a party should notDe|penalized.IT|apped[stnat|Of)accountOT inadvertence, the senior chartered accountant engaged|by the assessee could not comply with the directions ofthe Tribunal to file the documents. The tribunal, infact,snould have adjudicated the matter on merits instead ofsummarily dismissing the same. 5. In view of preceding analysis, the substantialquestion of law framed by this Court is answered in.favour of the assessee and against the revenue. — In the result, the order passed by the tribunal isquashed. The matter is remitted to the tribunal.Needless to state that the assessee shall file the audited accounts and computation of income as directed by thetribunal within a period of four weeks from the date of.receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, ����������������������%������������������������������������������6������������������������������ "������������������������������&���� ����������������������� �:�