PATIL CONSTRUCITON, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 3(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1652/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3375 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 25-02-2011
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR DARSI SUMAN RATNAM
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) & RAMLAL NEGI (JM) I.T.A. NO. 1652 /MUM/ 20 11 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 4 - 0 5 ) PATIL CONSTRUCTION 4, SUPRIYA APPARTMENT GROUND FLOOR PAKHADI NAKA KHAREGAON NEAR KALWA THANE - 400 605. VS. ITO WARD 3(2) VARDAAN LOWER GROUND FLOOR WAGLE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE THANE WEST PIN - 400 604. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) PAN NO . AAMFM8782F ASSESSEE BY NONE DEPARTMENT BY DR. DARSI SUMAN RATNAM DATE OF HEARING 9 . 6. 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 9 . 6 . 201 6 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, A M : - THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15.11.2010 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) - 1 , THANE A ND IT RELATES TO A.Y. 200 4 - 0 5 . 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH THE NOTICE OF HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION. HENCE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EX - PARTE, WITHOUT PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE NOTICED THAT THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT CERTAIN DEFECT S IN THE APPEAL MEMO FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND TILL DATE DEFECTS HAVE NOT BEEN RECTIFIED, EVEN THOUGH THE APPEAL WAS FILED WAY BACK IN FEBRUARY, 2011. HENCE ON THIS GROUND ALONE, THIS APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. PATIL CONSTRUCTION 2 4. GROUNDS OF APPEAL URG E D BY THE ASSESSEE RELATE TO THE VALIDITY OF REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT AND ADDITION OF ` 8.25 LAKHS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5 . W E HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A). WE NOTICE THAT THE F IRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS PASSED A REASONED ORDER ON THE ISSUES URGED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY MATERIAL IN ORDER TO CONTROVERT THE DECISION GIVEN BY LEARNED CIT(A) ON BOTH THE ISSUES . UNDER THESE SET OF FACTS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE SAME. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9. 6 .2016 . SD/ - SD/ - (RAMLAL NEGI ) (B.R.BASKARAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 9 / 6/ 20 1 6 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMB AI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI PS