Swetha Realmart LLP (Successor In Interest Swetha Health Research Pvt. Ltd.) v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-6(1)(2), Bengaluru
[Citation -2020-LL-1103-30]

Citation 2020-LL-1103-30
Appellant Name Swetha Realmart LLP (Successor In Interest Swetha Health Research Pvt. Ltd.)
Respondent Name The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-6(1)(2), Bengaluru
Court HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 03/11/2020
Assessment Year 2016-17
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags substantial question of law • computation of income • documentary evidence • depreciable asset
Bot Summary: The assessee thereupon approached the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal by filing an appeal. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had engaged a senior chartered accountant and the tribunal had directed the assessee to file the document pertaining to audited accounts and computation of income. The senior chartered accountant could not apprehend the same and could not comply with the directions issued by the tribunal. The tribunal, infact, should have adjudicated the matter on merits instead of summarily dismissing the same. In the result, the order passed by the tribunal is quashed. Needless to state that the assessee shall file the audited accounts and computation of income as directed by the tribunal within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, 6 before the tribunal. Thereupon, the tribunal shall proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits.


1 IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 PRESENT HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.157 OF 2020 BETWEEN: M/S. SWETHA REALMART LLP (SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST OF M/S. SWETHA HEALTH RESEARCH PVT. LTD.) NO.7, SAMYAKT UTTARADHI MUTT ROAD NEAR NATIONAL COLLEGE SHANKARAPURAM, 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: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(2), BMTC BUILDING 80 FT. ROAD, 6TH BLOCK NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) 2 THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW STATED ABOVE. II. ALLOW APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE IMPUGNED ORDER OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU 'C' BENCH BEARING IN ITA NO.2435/BANG/2019 DATED 29/05/2020 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 AS ENCLOSED IN ANNEXURE-A & ETC. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act , for short) has been preferred by assessee. subject matter of appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2016-17. appeal which was admitted by this Court to consider following substantial questions of law: Whether, in facts and circumstances of case, Tribunal is right in law in dismissing Appeal instead of disposing matter on merits. 3 2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that assessee filed return of income by declaring income of Rs.15,64,59,600/- for Assessment Year 2016-17. order of assessment was passed under Section 143(3) of Act by Assessing Officer on 21.12.2018. assessee thereafter filed appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who, by order dated 30.09.2019, dismissed appeal preferred by assessee. assessee thereupon approached Income Tax Appellate Tribunal by filing appeal. tribunal, by order dated 29.05.2020, dismissed appeal inter alia on ground that in absence of documentary evidence in support of assessee's claim that property sold in question was not depreciable asset, no ground is made out to interfere with order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 4 In aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for assessee submitted that assessee had engaged senior chartered accountant and tribunal had directed assessee to file document pertaining to audited accounts and computation of income. However, senior chartered accountant could not apprehend same and could not comply with directions issued by tribunal. tribunal, however, instead of examining matter on merits, dismissed appeal without adjudicating issue on merits. It is further submitted that in case matter is remitted to tribunal, assessee undertakes to file audited documents and computation of income before tribunal within period of four weeks from date of receipt of certified copy of order passed today. On other hand, learned counsel for revenue has opposed prayer. 5 4. We have considered submissions made by learned counsel for parties. It is trite law that for fault committed by counsel, party should not be penalized. It appears that on account of inadvertence, senior chartered accountant engaged by assessee could not comply with directions of Tribunal to file documents. tribunal, infact, should have adjudicated matter on merits instead of summarily dismissing same. 5. In view of preceding analysis, substantial question of law framed by this Court is answered in favour of assessee and against revenue. In result, order passed by tribunal is quashed. matter is remitted to tribunal. Needless to state that assessee shall file audited accounts and computation of income as directed by tribunal within period of four weeks from date of receipt of certified copy of order passed today, 6 before tribunal. Thereupon, tribunal shall proceed to adjudicate appeal on merits. Accordingly, appeal is allowed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV Swetha Realmart LLP (Successor In Interest Swetha Health Research Pvt. Ltd.) v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-6(1)(2), Bengaluru
Report Error