Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 2111
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (CHENNAI BENCH)
Shri Mahavir Singh, VP, Shri S.R. Raghunatha, AM
Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent
Income Tax Appeal | IT(TP)A No.: 11/CHNY/2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCA
For the Respondents: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Delayed appeals require substantial and justifiable reasons for condonation; mere acknowledgment of hardship is insufficient.
Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 143(3), 14A, 92CA, 144C - Appeal against final assessment order time-barred by 3300 days; the petitioner submitted a condonation of delay petition - The court found no sufficient reasons offered for the substantial delay and dismissed the appeal without admission. (Paras 4, 5)
Facts of the case:
The appellant, a company engaged in exporting agro products, appealed against a final assessment order dated 30.01.2015 and requested a condonation of a delay exceeding 3300 days citing the ongoing financial crisis and other legal proceedings involving corporate insolvency.
Findings of Court:
The court held that the reasons provided for delay were inadequate and thus denied the request for condonation.
Issues: The critical issue was whether the substantial delay in filing the appeal warranted condonation based on the reasons submitted.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the mere acknowledgment of a financial crisis cannot justify a delay of such magnitude; thus, the appeal was dismissed for failing to meet the necessary legal standards.
Result: The appeal is dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding the appeal and relevant background. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. discussion on delay and justifications for condonation. (Para 4) |
| 3. final ruling on dismissal of the appeal. (Para 5) |
आदेश/ORDER
PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the final assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle -6(2), Chennai dated 30.01.2015 passed in pursuant to the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), Chennai dated 27.11.2014.
2. At the outset, we noted that this appeal is time barred by 3300 days and the assessee has filed condonation of delay petition stating various reasons, including dismissal of assessee's petition earlier also in M.Ps. The assessee now letter dated 04.06.2024 has narrated entire facts in its petition as under:
"1.The Petitioner is engaged in the business of exporting agro products, shipping and logistics, realty and hospitality and education/e-learning businesses. The Petitioner on 28.09.2009 had filed its Return of Income (ROI) for the Assessment Year 2010-11 u/s 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") admitting a total income of Rs.10,19,09,88,790/-.
2.Subsequently, on 29.08.2011, the Petitioner's case was selected for limited scrutiny and Notice u/s 143(2) was issued to the Petitioner. The Petitioner had merged with M/s. Siva Industries and Holdings Limited (Siva Ventures Limited (SVL) Merged with Siva Industries and Holdings Limited) (hereinafter referred to as "SVL") and the same was confirmed vide order dated 22.08.2013 passed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in Comp. Petn. Nos.84 to 93 of 2013. Pursuant to the merger another Notice dated 08.10.2013 u/s 143(2) r.w.s 129 of the Act was served on the Petitioner. On 29.01.2014 the Transfer Pricing Officer passed orders u/s 92 CA (3) of the Act, suggesting the addition of Rs.28,68,73,143/- towards interest short charged and uncharged guarantee commission fee to the SVL.
3.The Petitioner submits that on 28.02.2014, a Draft Assessment Order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 92CA(3) of the Act was passed by the JCIT making significant additions to the income of the Petitioner to the tune of Rs.11,08,65,95,132/- In response, the Petitioner filed an application dated 08.04.2014 before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) in Form 35A objecting to the addition u/s 92CA and Disallowance u/s 14A proposed in the Draft Assessment Order dated 28.02.2014. It is pertinent to note that in the said application M/s. Siva Ventures Ltd ( SVL) had specifically stated that they have merged with M/s. Siva Industries and Holdings Limited. The Petitioner submits that on 27.11.2014, the DRP held that the action of the Assessing Officer of determining the expenses attributable for earning exempt income at Rs.59,84,01,199/- u/s. 14A r.w.r.8D, is as per law and justified.
4.Thereafter, the AO, based on the directions of the DRP vide Order dated 27.11.2014, had passed a Final Assessment Order dated 30.01.2015 by assessing the income at Rs.11,08,66,95, 132/- for SVL.
5.The Petitioner aggrieved by the Final order approached the Hon'ble Income. Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITA T) on 06.04.2015 in ITA No. 687 of 2015.
6.The Petitioner submits that parallelly on 24.03.2014, an Assessment Order was passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 92CA(3) of the IT Act, 1961 in the name of Mis. Siva Industries and Holding Limited. In response to this the Petitioner Filed application before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) in Form 35A objecting the addition u/s 92CA and Disallowance u/s 14A proposed in the Draft Assessment Order dated 24.03.2014. On 12.12.2014, the DRP held that the Assessing Officer's action of determining the expenses attributable for earning exempt income at Rs.65,68,07,825/- u/s. 14A r.w.r.8D is as per law and justified. Therefore, the proposals for disallowance of expenses by the Assessing Officer u/s. I4A r.w.r.8D, is justified and confirmed.
7.The Petitioner submits that the Deputy commis
