DCIT CC 5(3), MUMBAI V. JAYBHARAT TEXTILES & REAL ESTATE LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1265/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0097 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 04-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA No. 1249/MUM/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Jaybharat Textiles & Real Estate Ltd., 11/12, Raghuvanshi Mill Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-5(3), Air India Building, 19 th floor, Room No. 1906, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. PAN No. AAACJ 5959 L Appellant Respondent ITA No. 1265/MUM/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 & ITA No. 1264/MUM/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Central Circle-5(3), Air India Building, 19 th floor, Room No. 1906, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Vs. M/s Jaybharat Textiles & Real Estate Ltd., 11/12, Raghuvanshi Mill Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013. PAN No. AAACJ 5959 L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Mr. Ashish Deharia, DR Date of Hearing : 06/06/2022 Date of pronouncement : 06/06/2022 PER OM PRAKASH KANT The Captioned appeals by the assessee as well as by the Revenue have been preferred against 15.12.2017 passed by the assessment years 2013 2. Despite notifying none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment was sought. Therefo ex-parte qua the assessee and disposed of of the Ld. Departmental Representative. 3. Before us the Ld. against the company insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code have been initiated and resolution professional has been appointed by the M/s Jaybharat Textiles & Real Estate ITA Nos. 1249, 1264 & ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM The Captioned appeals by the assessee as well as by the Revenue have been preferred against a common order passed by the Ld. First Appellate Authority assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15. Despite notifying none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment was sought. Therefore, these appeals were heard qua the assessee and disposed off after hearing submission Departmental Representative. Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that against the company insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code have been initiated and resolution professional has been appointed by the Hon’ble M/s Jaybharat Textiles & Real Estate Ltd. ITA Nos. 1249, 1264 & 1265/M/2018 2 The Captioned appeals by the assessee as well as by the a common order dated First Appellate Authority in respect of Despite notifying none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor re, these appeals were heard after hearing submission Departmental Representative submitted that against the company insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code have been initiated and Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal India as financial creditor. 4. On perusal of the record, it is seen that on one authorized signatory has requested for adjournment in view of the pendency of resolution proces that in said adjournment request, there is no name of the person who signed the adjournment request, nor any authority issued by the resolution professionals is enclosed. Further we find that, as held by the coordinate bench Ltd. in ITA No. 2979 to 2981 professional was required to amend prosecuting the appeal and in absence of which appeals held to be non-maintainable. We find that in the instant case also resolution process has been initiated against the assessee and the resolution professional has taken over affairs of the company from the old management of the company and therefore he was M/s Jaybharat Textiles & Real Estate ITA Nos. 1249, 1264 & ny Law Tribunal (NCLT) on the petition filed by the Bank of India as financial creditor. On perusal of the record, it is seen that on previous occasion, ed signatory has requested for adjournment in view of the pendency of resolution process before the NCLT, that in said adjournment request, there is no name of the person who signed the adjournment request, nor any authority issued by the resolution professionals is enclosed. Further we find that, as held by the coordinate bench in the case of in the case of . in ITA No. 2979 to 2981/Mum/2020, the resolution professional was required to amend Form No. 36A for further prosecuting the appeal and in absence of which appeals maintainable. We find that in the instant case also resolution process has been initiated against the assessee and the resolution professional has taken over affairs of the company from the old management of the company and therefore he was M/s Jaybharat Textiles & Real Estate Ltd. ITA Nos. 1249, 1264 & 1265/M/2018 3 petition filed by the Bank of previous occasion, ed signatory has requested for adjournment in view of s before the NCLT, but, we find that in said adjournment request, there is no name of the person who signed the adjournment request, nor any authority issued by the resolution professionals is enclosed. Further we find that, as in the case of in the case of Orbit Corp , the resolution No. 36A for further prosecuting the appeal and in absence of which appeals have been maintainable. We find that in the instant case also resolution process has been initiated against the assessee and the resolution professional has taken over affairs of the company from the old management of the company and therefore he was required to amend the Form No. 36A, but despite several opportunities so far the Form No. 36A i.e. the form prescribed for filing appeal before the ITAT, has not been amended by the respective appeals. So in the circumstances, consideration are not maintainable in present format. 4.1 Accordingly, aforesaid appeals maintainable at this stage, with liberty to file fresh appeals in proper format duly verified by the person authorized the Income-tax Act, 1961 and ITAT Rules, 1963 restored by moving an appropriate application before the Tribunal by both the assessee as well Revenue, Order pronounced in the Court. Sd/- (ABY T. VARKEY JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 06/06/2022 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant M/s Jaybharat Textiles & Real Estate ITA Nos. 1249, 1264 & to amend the Form No. 36A, but despite several opportunities so far the Form No. 36A i.e. the form prescribed for filing appeal before the ITAT, has not been amended by the assessee and Revenue respective appeals. So in the circumstances, the appeals under consideration are not maintainable in present format. Accordingly, aforesaid appeals are dismissed being non maintainable at this stage, with liberty to file fresh appeals in proper format duly verified by the person authorized as per provisions of tax Act, 1961 and ITAT Rules, 1963 or get restored by moving an appropriate application before the Tribunal by both the assessee as well Revenue, if so advised. ounced in the Court. Sd/- ABY T. VARKEY) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT Copy of the Order forwarded to : M/s Jaybharat Textiles & Real Estate Ltd. ITA Nos. 1249, 1264 & 1265/M/2018 4 to amend the Form No. 36A, but despite several opportunities so far the Form No. 36A i.e. the form prescribed for filing appeal before the Revenue in their the appeals under consideration are not maintainable in present format. dismissed being non- maintainable at this stage, with liberty to file fresh appeals in proper er provisions of or get these appeals restored by moving an appropriate application before the Tribunal - OM PRAKASH KANT) MEMBER 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy// M/s Jaybharat Textiles & Real Estate ITA Nos. 1249, 1264 & BY ORDER, (Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Mumbai M/s Jaybharat Textiles & Real Estate Ltd. ITA Nos. 1249, 1264 & 1265/M/2018 5 Sr. Private Secretary) ITAT, Mumbai