AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Renu Jauhri, Accountant Member:
The above captioned appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.08.2025, passed by CIT(A)/NFAC u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for A.Y. 2024-25.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
"1.That the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in the facts, the law, and the circumstances of the case by upholding the order u/s 154 of the Central Processing Centre (CPC), Income Tax Department, Bengaluru, without going into the detailed facts of the case.
2.That the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in the facts, the law, and the circumstances of the case by upholding the order of the CPC, without providing any opportunity of being heard. The order has been passed only on the basis of the statement of facts and grounds of appeal submitted by the Appellant. No opportunity of filing of written submission was provided to the Appellant. No notice for hearing was issued u/s 250 for filing of its contention to the Appellant.
3.That the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in the facts, the law, and the circumstances of the case by upholding the order of the CPC, ignoring the facts of the case and denied the benefit of reduced rate of tax u/s 115BAB as per the provisions of the Act, i.e., 15% (plus applicable surcharge and cess).
4.That the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in the facts, the law, and the circumstances of the case by upholding the order of the CPC, only the basis, that the Appellant had not debited any direct expenditure to the manufacturing account, the CIT(A) considered that there is no manufacturing activity in the business of the Appellant. He totally ignored the amount of direct expenses debited to the profit and loss account and also the amount of investment made by the Appellant in the fixed assets to install the plant for the purpose of the manufacturing during the year under consideration.
5.That the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in the facts, the law, and the circumstances of the case by upholding the order of the CPC, in interpreting the provision and conditions as described in section 115BAB(2) of the Act.
6.That the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in the facts, the law, and the circumstances of the case by upholding the order of the CPC and denying the benefit of reduced rate applicable u/s 115BAB on the facts of the case that before commencement of the operation the Appellant was involved in the trading of the products which it had planned to manufacture. Ignoring the fact that the trading was done only to understand the market of the product only on test basis so that after starting manufacturing, it should not face any problem in the selling the product manufactured in its unit.
7.Without prejudice to the above grounds of the appeal, the Appellant pray before the Hon'ble Tribunal to provide an opportunity to the Appellant to claim the reduced rate of tax @ 22% with a surcharge and education cess u/s 115BAA of the Act by following the procedure as needed under the provisions of the Act, in case, it is decided that the Appellant is not eligible for beneficial rate as provided u/s 115BAB of the Act from the AY under discussion and the succeeding years.
8.That the Ld. AO has further erred in calculating and levying interest u/s 234A, u/s 234B, and u/s 234C of the Act which are not leviable on the facts of the instant case.
9.The Appellant submits that each of the above grounds is independent and without prejudice to the other grounds of appeal preferred by the Appellant."
At the outset, ld. AR has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any opportunity of being heard. He has therefore requested for restoring back the matter to Id. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee due opportunity of being heard. Id. DR has not objected to the above proposition.
We have heard the rival submission and perused the material on record. It is seen that no notice of hearing was issued to the assessee u/s 250 by the Id. CIT(A) to enable him to make his submissions. The order has been passed simply on the basis of grounds of appeal and statement of facts submitted at the time of institution of appeal. Under these circumstances, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the Id. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.