Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 3 v. Ratnesh Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABADR/TAX APPEAL NO. 1331 of 2018 =============================================PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3 Versus RATNESH METAL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ============================================= Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Appellant(s) No. 1MR. HARDIK V VORA(7123) for the Opponent(s) No. 1============================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALAand HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C. RAO Date : 30/07/2019 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1.This Tax Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act, 1961”) is at the instance of the Revenue and is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Ahmedabad, dated 28.06.2018 in the ITA No.112/Ahd/2018 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2.The Revenue has proposed the following substantial question of law for the consideration of this Court: “Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and facts in setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer when the assessee had been given reasonable opportunities of hearing by CIT(A) but assessee chose to not represent its case?” 3.We take notice of the fact that the Appellate Tribunal thought fit to remit the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration of the issues as the assessee was not able to remain present before the CIT(A). If we were to hear the matter on merits, we would have only considered the question whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in remitting the matter to the CIT(A) in the facts and circumstances of the case. However, before we could take up the matter for hearing on merits, Mr. Hardik Vora, the learned counsel appearing for the assessee pointed out that the present tax appeal need not be adjudicated on merits because of the law tax effect. Mr. Vora has furnished statement with regard to the total addition and the tax effect at 30%. The statement is as under : “Additions / disallowances disputed : On account of disallowance of interest of on Purchase of Capital Asset : Rs.51,81,558/-On account of disallowance of Interest of on Interest free advance : Rs.10,65,860/-On account of disallowance of interest on interest free advance : Rs.74692/- On account of addition of unsecured loan : Rs.15,00,000/- Total Addition Rs.78,22,110/- Tax Effect @ 30% Rs.23.46.633/-” 4.As against the above, Mr. Bhatt, the learned senior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue invited the attention of this Court to Page.19 of the paper-book. Page.19 is the order of the Assessing Officer. In paragraph 9, a chart has been shown as regards computation of the total income of the assessee. It is as under : 5.Mr.Vora submitted that before the CIT(A) he gave up two claims; one with respect to the addition under Section 43B to the tune of Rs.5,81,892/- and addition of Brought Forward Loss to the tune of Rs.81,32,167/-. Mr.Vora submitted that the following were the reliefs prayed for before the CIT(A) : “1)To delete the addition of Rs.51,81,558/- made by the Ld.AO in the income of the appellant company u/s.36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act.2)To delete the addition of Rs.10,65,860/- made by the Ld.AO u/s 36(1)(iii) of the IT Act. 3)To delete the addition of Rs.74,692/- made by the Ld. AO u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act. 4)To delete the addition of Rs.15 lacs without mentioning the Section of the I.T. Act.mentioning the Section of the I.T. Act. 5)Any other reliefs as may be admissible in case of Appellant may also be granted.Appellant may also be granted. 6)Your appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or to amend all or any of the grounds before the final hearing.” “1)To delete the addition of Rs.51,81,558/- made by the Ld.AO in the income of the appellant company u/s.36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act.2)To delete the addition of Rs.10,65,860/- made by the Ld.AO u/s 36(1)(iii) of the IT Act. 3)To delete the addition of Rs.74,692/- made by the Ld. AO u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act. 4)To delete the addition of Rs.15 lacs without mentioning the Section of the I.T. Act.mentioning the Section of the I.T. Act. 5)Any other reliefs as may be admissible in case of Appellant may also be granted.Appellant may also be granted. 6)Your appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or to amend all or any of the grounds before the final hearing.” 6.According to Mr. Vora, from the above, it is apparent that the claim with regard to addition under Section 43B as well as the addition of Brought Forward Loss was given up. If that be so, then, the appeal would be covered under the low tax effect. We recorded the statement of Mr. Vora that the assessee has given up the claim with regard to addition under Section 43B as well as the addition of the Brought Forward Loss, as referred to above. With the above, this Tax Appeal is disposed of. (J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (A. C. RAO, J) Dolly