M/S. SUNRAJ ENTERPRISES , MUMBAI V. CIT (APPEALS) - 1, THANE, THANE

ITA 1322/MUM/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7781 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 26-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 200A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA No. 1322/MUM/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 & ITA No. 1324/MUM/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 & ITA No. 1323/MUM/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s Sunraj Enterprises, Siddheshwar Park, Opp. Vaastu Anand, Parsik, Kharegaon, Kalwa, Thane-400 605. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Room No. 29, A-Wing, 6 th floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane-400 604. PAN No.ABRFS 4336 D AppellantRespondent Assessee by:None Revenue by:Mr. B.K. Bagchi, DR D at e o f H e a r i n g:11/11/2021 D a t e o f p r o n o u n c e m e n t:24/11/2021 ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M. The captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the respective orders passed by the CIT(A)-1, Thane dated 17.12.2019 for AYs 2013- 14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. As the issue involved in the captioned appeals are inextricably interlinked or in fact interwoven and having common issue, the M/s Sunraj Enterprises ITA Nos. 1322, 1323 & 1324/M/2020 2 same are therefore being taken up and disposed off by way of a consolidated order. Facts being identical, we begin with the AY 2013-14. ITA No. 1322/MUM/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 2.At the outset, it is noticed that none appeared on behalf of assessee in spite of calls and even no application for adjournment was moved. On the other hand, Ld. DR is present in the court and is ready with arguments. Therefore, we have decided to proceed with the hearing of the caseex-partewith the assistance of the Ld. DR and the material placed on record. 3.Brief facts of the case are, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A)-1, Thane against the order passed u/s 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’). After filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed letter dated 10.12.2019 requesting for withdrawal of the appeal in AYs under appeal i.e. 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Based on the above letter of withdrawal, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn being infructuous. Now, the assessee filed appeal before us with the plea that the assessee has withdrawn the appeal before CIT(A)-1, Thane due to mistake of staff of Chartered Accountant. The staff noticed by mistake that there is no penalty listed on late filing of TDS in the TRACES. However, later it was found by the assessee that it is a mistake on the part of staff of the Chartered Accountant and noticed that the demand was still alive. In this regard, the assessee also filed an affidavit from the staff of Chartered Accountant i.e. Mr. Pratik Chandrakant Chavan. M/s Sunraj Enterprises ITA Nos. 1322, 1323 & 1324/M/2020 3 4.Considering the above facts on record, we observed that the assessee has withdrawn the appeal filed before Ld. CIT(A) with mistaken belief that the late fee levied by the Department is deleted. However, the Department has not deleted the late fees in the case of the assessee. Since, the staff of the Chartered Accountant wrongly noticed that waiver of the fees of the another client and by mistake advised the same to the Chartered Accountant and the assessee. At the advice of the Chartered Accountant, the assessee has withdrawn the appeal on mistaken belief that there is no demand. For the sake of justice, we deem it fit and proper to remit this issue back to the file of the CIT(A) to consider the issue and decide the issue on merit. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 5.Facts are being identical, our decision for the AY 2013-14 appliesmutatis mutandisto AYs. 2014-15 & 2015-16. 6.In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24/11/2021. Sd/-Sd/- (C.N. PRASAD)(S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBERACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated:24/11/2021 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.The Appellant 2.The Respondent. 3.The CIT(A)- M/s Sunraj Enterprises ITA Nos. 1322, 1323 & 1324/M/2020 4 4.CIT 5.DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6.Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai