MAPLE WOOD LTD ( NOW KNOWN AS M.S, MW LTD), MUMBAI V. DDIT (iT) 1(2), MUMBAI

CO 68/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8128 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 14-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: L
• Next Hearing Date: 11-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUNIL LALA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

, , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES L, MUMBAI .. , ! '# $% , & !, ' BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, AM AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM ./ ITA NO.4909/MUM/2010 ( &) * &) * &) * &) * / / / / ASST YEAR : 2009-2010) THE DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 1(2) MUMBAI. M/S.MAPLE WOOD LIMITED (NOW KNOWN AS M/S.M.W.LIMITED) C/O.A.K.JHUNJHUNWALA & CO. CAS, 59 MAKER TOWER F CUFFE PARADE, MUMBAI 400 005. PAN : AAFCM9371G. ( +, / // / APPELLANT) ) ) ) ) / VS. ( -.+,/ RESPONDENT) -.' ./ CO NO.68/MUM/2011 ( &) * &) * &) * &) * / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-2010) M/S.MAPLE WOOD LIMITED MUMBAI 400 005. THE DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 1(2) MUMBAI. ( -.' / CROSS OBJECTOR) ) ) ) ) / VS. ( -.+,/ RESPONDENT) / 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 / REVENUE BY : SHRI NARENDER KUMAR &) 2# 0 1 / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SUNIL LALA ) 0 # / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 12.12.2012 34* 0 # / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.12.2012 !$ !$ !$ !$ / / / / O R D E R PER R.S.SYAL, AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION BY T HE ASSESSEE ARISE OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER O F INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ON 23 RD MARCH, 2010 PURSUANT TO THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 201(1) AND 201(1A) IN RELATIO N TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010. ITA NO.4909/M/2010 & CO 68/M/2011 M/S.MAPLE WOOD LIMITED. 2 2. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTE D AT THE VERY OUTSET THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH RELEVANT D ETAILS AT THE TIME OF PASSING OF ORDER U/S 201(1) AND 201(1A). SUCH DETAI LS WERE FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THE FIRST TIME, WHO, WIT HOUT CONFRONTING SUCH DETAILS TO THE A.O. OR CALLING FOR ANY REMAND REPORT, DECIDED THE MAJOR ISSUE IN ASSESSEES FAVOUR. IT WAS, THEREFORE , CONTENDED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER BE SET ASIDE. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FO R THE ASSESSEE WAS FAIR ENOUGH TO CONCEDE THE FACT THAT THE RELEVA NT DETAILS WERE FILED FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND TH ERE IS A VIOLATION OF RULE 46A OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962. THE LEARNED AR ALSO CONTENDED THAT INSOFAR AS THE ASSESSEES C.O. IS CO NCERNED, THE ISSUE DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IS AGAIN WITHOUT CONSI DERING THE RELEVANT DETAILS FURNISHED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE CRUX OF THE SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY THE RIVAL PARTIES IS THAT THE ORDER U/ S 201(1) AND 201(1A) WAS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT ANY PRO PER ASSISTANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE LEARNED CIT(A ) DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL BY CONSIDERING CERTAIN EVIDENCE FOR THE FIRS T TIME IN VIOLATION OF RULE 46 OF THE I.T RULES, 1962. IN THE PREVAILI NG CIRCUMSTANCES, AS AGREED TO BY BOTH THE SIDES, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUG NED ORDER AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF A.O. FOR PASSING A FRESH ORDER U/S 201(1) AND 201(1A) AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER ALLOWING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. NEEDLES S TO SAY THE ITA NO.4909/M/2010 & CO 68/M/2011 M/S.MAPLE WOOD LIMITED. 3 ASSESSEE WILL EXTEND FULL CO-OPERATION TO THE ASSES SING OFFICER AND WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO LEAD ANY EVIDENCE IN ITS DEF ENCE IN SUCH DE NOVO PROCEEDINGS 4. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL AND ASSESSEE S CROSS OBJECTION ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 14 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2012. !$ 0 34* 5!)6 4 0 7 SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (R.S.SYAL) & ! & ! & ! & ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER ! ! ! ! / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 5!) DATED : 14 TH DECEMBER, 2012. DEVDAS* !$ 0 -&#'8 98*# !$ 0 -&#'8 98*# !$ 0 -&#'8 98*# !$ 0 -&#'8 98*#/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. +, / THE APPELLANT 2. -.+, / THE RESPONDENT. 3. : () / THE CIT(A)-II, MUMBAI. 4. : / CIT 5. 8=7 -&#&) , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 7> ? / GUARD FILE. !$) !$) !$) !$) / BY ORDER, .8# -&# //TRUE COPY// @ @ @ @/ // /A / A / A / A / ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, MUMBAI