VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION P.LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT 13(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1678/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2960 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJEEV GUBGOTRA; sunil kumar poddar
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3); 133(6)

Judgement Text

IN THE INC OME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HONBLE SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN , JM & HONBLE SH. RAJESH KUMAR, AM ./ I.T.A. NO . 1678/MUM/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13 ) M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. UNI T NO. 405 - 408, HIND RAJASTHAN C E N TRE, D. S. PHALKE ROAD, DADAR (E), MUMBAI - 400014 . / VS. DCIT 13(3 )(2) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 020 ./ ./ PAN NO. AADCV3311M ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) ./ I.T.A. NO . 1679/MUM/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13 ) M/S VINDHYAVASINI IRON INDIA PVT. LTD. UNIT NO. 405 - 408, HIND RAJASTHAN CENTRE, D. S. PHALKE ROAD, DADAR (E), MUMBAI - 400014. / VS. DCIT 13(3)(2) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 020 ./ ./ PAN NO. AADCV1783D ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) 2 I.T.A. NO. 1678 TO 1681 /MUM/201 7 & ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. & OTHERS ./ I.T.A. NO . 1680 /MUM/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13 ) M/S VINDHYAVASINI STEEL CORPORATION PVT. LTD. UNIT NO. 405 - 408, HIND RAJASTHAN CENTRE, D. S. PHALKE ROAD, DADAR (E), MUMBAI - 400014. / VS. DCIT 13(3)(2) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 020 ./ ./ PAN NO. AADCV5987F ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) ./ I.T.A. NO . 1681/MUM/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13 ) M/S VINDHYAVASINI STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. UNIT NO. 405 - 408, HIND RAJASTHAN CENTRE, D. S. PHALKE ROAD, DADAR (E), MUMBAI - 400014. / VS. DCIT 13(3)(3) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 020 ./ ./ PAN NO. AADCV5518N ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) & ./ I.T.A. NO . 4927/MUM/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 ) M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. UNIT NO. 405 - 408, HIND RAJASTHAN CENTRE, D. S. PHALKE ROAD, DADAR (E), MUMBAI - 400014. / VS. DCIT 9(3) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 020 ./ ./ PAN NO. AADCV3311M ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) 3 I.T.A. NO. 1678 TO 1681 /MUM/201 7 & ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. & OTHERS / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENTBY : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR PODDAR /RAJEEV GUBGOTRA , DR / DATE OF HEARING : 20.12 .2018 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.03.2019 / O R D E R PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, J UDICIAL MEMBER : THE PRESENT FIVE (5) APPEAL S HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMIS S IONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 21, MUMBAI, DATED 19.12.16 AND 01.03.16 FOR AY 2012 - 13 AND 2011 - 12 RESPECTIVE LY. 2. SINC E THE ISSUES RAISED IN THESE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL, THEREFORE, FOR TH E SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THESE APPEALS ARE CLUBBED, HEARD AND DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDE R. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, WE NOTICE THAT ASSESSEE WAS SEEKING DATES BY MOVING ADJOURNMENT APPLICATIONS ON ONE PRETEXT OR THE 4 I.T.A. NO. 1678 TO 1681 /MUM/201 7 & ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. & OTHERS O THER. WE NOTICE THAT WHEN THE CASE WAS FIXED ON 26 TH JULY 2018, THEN ON THAT DATE ALSO , AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS MOVED ON THE GROUND THAT AS THE C.A. OF THE ASSESSEE IS OUT OF TOWN AND THEREFORE CONSIDERING THIS FACT, THE MATTERS WERE ADJOURNED T O 20.08.18. EVEN ON THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING , AGAIN AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS MOVED ON THE GROUND THAT THE DETAILS OF THE CASE ARE UNDER PREPARATION AND THEREFORE AGAIN CONSIDERING THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE, MATTER WAS ADJOURNED TO 14.11.18. EVEN ON THAT DAY AGAIN, AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS MOVED ON THE GROUND THAT CA OF THE ASSESSEE IS OUT OF TOWN AND IS NOT AVAILABLE, THEN AGAIN MA TTER WAS ADJOURNED TO 20.12 .18, BUT TODAY AGAIN NOBODY HAD APP EARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN INSPITE OF CALLS. FROM THE RECORDS, WE NOTICE THAT THERE IS A LETTER DATED 19.12.18 ON THE COURT FILE, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAD REQUESTED TO SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO . HOWEVER NOBODY IS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO PURSUE OR SUBSTANTIATE THE CO NTENTS OF THE APPEAL. THEREFORE , IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE LEFT WITH NO OTHER OPTION EXCEPT TO PROCEED THE ASSESSEE EX - PARTE. ON THE OTHER HAND 5 I.T.A. NO. 1678 TO 1681 /MUM/201 7 & ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. & OTHERS L D. DR IS PRESENT IN THE COURT AND IS READY WITH ARGUMENTS. THEREFORE WE HAVE DECIDED TO PROCEED WITH THE HEARING OF THE CASE EX - PA RTE WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE L D. DR AND THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. I.T.A. NO. 1678 /MUM/201 7 (AY 2012 - 13 ) 4 . FIRST OF ALL WE TAKE UP ASSESSEE S APPEAL IN I.T.A. NO. 1678 /MUM/201 7 (AY 2012 - 13 ) ON THE GROUNDS MENTIONED HEREIN BELOW: - 1. THAT ON FA CTS OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE L D. C.I.T.(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE VALIDITY OF THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDING INITIATED U/S. 147 BY ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 148 ON WRONG FACTS AND IN UNLAWFUL MANNER . 2. THAT THE L D. C.I.T.(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 9,02,640 / - BEING 12.5% OF THE PURCHASES OF TRADING GOODS FROM THE ALLEGED SUSPICIOUS HAWALA DEALERS OF RS. 72,21,106/ - WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND LAW. THAT BOTH THE APPEAL GROUNDS ARE INDEPENDENT GROUNDS & WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER. 6 I.T.A. NO. 1678 TO 1681 /MUM/201 7 & ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. & OTHERS THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE LEAVE TO AMEND, ALTER, SUBSTITUTE AND OR TO RAISE NEW OR ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 5 . AS PER THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, T HE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FILED ON 29.09.12 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 2, 92,49,104 / - . SUBSEQUENTLY, T HE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND AFTER SERVING STATUTORY NOTICES, ASSESSMENT ORDER W AS PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT ON 27 .03.15 THEREBY INCOME OF THE ASSESS EE WAS ASSESSED AT RS. 9,49,58,310 / - AND ADDITIONS WERE MADE . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AND LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE CASE OF BOTH THE PARTIES DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), ASSESSES HAVE FILED THEIR RESPECTIVE APPEALS BEFORE US. HOWEVER AT PRESENT WE ARE DEALING WITH THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEARING ITA NO. 1678 /M UM/201 7 ON THE GROUNDS MENTIONED HEREIN ABOVE. GROUND NO. 1 TO 5 7 I.T.A. NO. 1678 TO 1681 /MUM/201 7 & ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. & OTHERS 6 . ALL THE GROUND S RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE INTER CONNECTED AND INTER RELATED AND RELATES TO CHAL LENGING THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITIONS MADE ON VARIOUS COUNTS , THEREFORE WE THOUGHT IT FIT TO DISPOSE OF THE SAME BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 7 . WE HAVE HEARD LD. DR AT LENGTH AND WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD AS WELL AS THE ORDERS PASSED BY REVENUE AUTHORITIES. FROM THE RECORDS, WE NOTICE TH AT ASSESSEE HAD NOT CO - OPERATED AT ANY STAGE OF PROCEEDING BEFORE AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT(A) AND ON PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, WE NOTICE THAT THERE WAS NON - COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN SUBMITTING THE DETAILS CALLED FOR IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS ARE NARRATED IN PARA NO. 5.1 OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT. 8. WE OBSERVED THAT AO HAD ISSUED NOTICE U/S 133(6) OF THE ACT TO SOME OF THE PARTIES FOR CONFIRMING THE PURCHASES AND ALSO TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, BUT NEITHER THE DIRECT OR NOR THE PARTIES HAD APPEARED. IT IS IN THIS BACKGROUND OF THE CASE AND THE DETAILS NARRATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE BOOK RESULTS 8 I.T.A. NO. 1678 TO 1681 /MUM/201 7 & ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. & OTHERS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS REJEC TED AND SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCLOSED GROSS PROFIT OF 4.97 %, THEREFORE THE SAME WAS ESTIMATED AT 6.5% BY THE AO AND ACCORDINGLY ADDITIONS WERE MADE. 9. ON APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEARED AND KEPT ON TALKING ADJOURNMENT ON ONE PRETEXT TO ANOTHER, WHICH HAVE BEEN MENTIONED IN TABULATED FORM IN PARA NO. 4 OF THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). WE FURTHER NOTICE THAT ASSESSEE HAD BEEN PERSISTENTLY REMAINED NON - COOPERATIVE THROUGHOUT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 10. NOW BEFORE US, THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS FI LED AN APPLICATION FOR REMANDING THE APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF AO MENTIONING FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEADING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, BUT HAS NOT COME FORWARD TO SUBSTANTIATE OR TO CONVINCE AS TO HOW, HE IS ENTITLED FOR THE RELIEF AS CLAIMED BY HIM. THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE THROUGHOUT REMAINED NON - COOPERATIVE AND THUS HIGHLY DEPLORABLE AND THUS IS DEPRECATED BY THE BENCH. 9 I.T.A. NO. 1678 TO 1681 /MUM/201 7 & ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. & OTHERS 11. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE SEE NO REASO N S TO INTERFERE INTO OR DEVIATE FROM THE FINDINGS SO RECORDED BY THE LD.CIT(A). HENCE , WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE FINDINGS SO RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT (A) ARE JUDICIOUS AND ARE WE LL REASONED. RESULTANTLY, THESE GROUND S RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED . GROUND NO. 6. 12. THIS GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS GENERAL IN NATURE, THUS REQUIRES NO SPECIFIC ADJUDICATION. 13. CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ITA NO. 1679, 1680, 1681/MUM/2017 (AY 2012 - 13 ) AND ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 (AY 2011 - 12) 1 4 . NOW WE TAKE UP ASSESSEE S APPEALS IN ITA NO. 1679, 1680, 1681/MUM/2017 (AY 2012 - 13) AND ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 (AY 2011 - 12) . SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY DECIDED THE SIMILAR G ROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA NO. 1678 /M UM/2017 FOR AY 2012 - 13 10 I.T.A. NO. 1678 TO 1681 /MUM/201 7 & ITA NO. 4927/MUM/2016 M/S VINDHYAVASINI CORPORATION PVT. LTD. & OTHERS ON MERITS. THEREFORE , FOLLOWING OUR OWN DECISION IN ITA NO. 1678 /MUM /17 , WE APPLY THE SAME FINDINGS IN THE SE PRESENT APPEAL S IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN JUDICIAL CONSISTENCY WHICH IS APPLICABLE MUTATIS MUTANDIS . 1 5 . IN THE NET RESULT, ALL THE APP EALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER DIFFERENT NAMES STA NDS DISMISSED WITH NO ORDER AS TO COST. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST MARCH , 2019 . SD/ - SD/ - (RAJESH KUMAR ) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 01 . 0 3 .201 9 SR.PS . DHANANJAY / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT - CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD F I LE / BY ORDER, . / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI