Shri Mohmedmubin M. Kadri, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1701/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0604 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 26-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LALIT P JAIN
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Condonation of delay
• Section: 13; 22

Judgement Text

, . . , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./I.T.A. NO.1701/AHD/2018 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) SHRI MOHMEDMUBIN M. KADRI PROP.OF SHAH KAYAMUDDIN INTERNATIONAL 18, SUHASINI FLAT B/H. MUSEUM TAGORE HALL, ELLISBRIDGE AHMEDABAD / VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(3)(1) AHMEDABAD ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. : AIIPK 2760 K ( /APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : -NONE- / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI LALIT P.JAIN, SR.DR /DATE OF HEARING 12/03/2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 13 / 0 3 /20 20 / O R D E R PER SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTAN CE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X (APPEALS) AHMEDABAD-5 [CIT(A) IN SHORT] VIDE APPEAL NO.CIT(A) - 5/ITO.WD.5(3)(1)/10031/2017-18 DATED 14/05/2018 ARI SING IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER S.143(3) R.W.S.147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, ITA NO.1701/AHD/2018 SHRI MOHMEDMUBIN M.KADRI VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2009-10 - 2 - 1961(HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT') DATED 22 /12/2016 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2009-10. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 O F IT ACT, 1961 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE FIRST AP PELLATE AUTHORITY IS BAD IN LAW AND DESERVED TO BE UNCALLED FOR. 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS FIRST APPELLATE AU THORITY HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN MAKING ADDITION AND CONFIRMING RESP ECTIVELY THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCE AMOUNT ING TO RS.22,10,000/- AND SAME DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE THE ADDITION IF ANY CAN BE MADE ONLY OF RS.13,75,000/- AS ADVERSE INFERENCE HAS BEEN DRAWN FOR THIS AMOUNT ONLY IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 3. TODAY, THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BUT NONE A PPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED ON RECORD. 4. FROM THE RECORDS, WE OBSERVE THAT REQUIRED NOTIC E WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST WHICH WAS DULY SERVED U PON THE ASSESSEE AND IN THIS RESPECT ACKNOWLEDGMENT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF POSTS HAS ALREADY BEEN PLACED ON RECORD WHICH SHOWS THAT EVEN IN SPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT COME BEFORE THIS COURT FOR ATTENDING THE HEARING WHICH GOES TO SHOW THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING WITH HIS PRESENT APPEAL. HOWEVER, LD.DR PRESENT IN THE COURT IS READY WITH THE ARGUMENTS, THEREFORE WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE A PPEAL ON MERITS EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING THE LD.DR. ITA NO.1701/AHD/2018 SHRI MOHMEDMUBIN M.KADRI VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2009-10 - 3 - 5. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ORDER U/S.1 43(3) R.W.S.147 OF THE ACT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 22/12/2016 THEREBY MAKING ADDITIONS ON ACCOUNT OF U NDISCLOSED SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE AO, ASSESSEE PREF ERRED APPEAL BEFORE LD.CIT(A), BUT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED . 7. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A), NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE GROUNDS MENTIONED HEREINABOVE. 8. COMING TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE , FROM THE RECORDS WE NOTICED THAT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) WAS FILED BEYOND THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION, THEREFORE LD.CIT(A ) AFTER CONSIDERING THE REASONS PUT FORTH BY THE ASSESSEE HAD REJECTED THE APPLICATION FOR SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY AND THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE WAS DISMISSED AS THE SAME WAS FOUND NOT MAINTAINABLE. 9. EVEN BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PUT FORTH A NY PLAUSIBLE REASONS OR JUSTIFICATION IN ORDER TO SUBSTANTIATE THE GROUN DS RAISED BY HIM. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PLACED ANY EVIDENCE IN ORDER TO SU BSTANTIATE AS TO HOW THE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR BY TH E CIT(A) WERE BAD IN LAW. SINCE THE ENTIRE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WENT UNREBUTED, THEREFORE WE SEE NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE OR DER OF THE LD.CIT(A), WHICH IS UPHELD AND THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSES SEE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO.1701/AHD/2018 SHRI MOHMEDMUBIN M.KADRI VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2009-10 - 4 - 10. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 13 - 03 - 2020 AT AHMEDABAD SD/- SD/- ( AMARJIT SINGH) ( SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 13/ 03 /2020 & . . , . ' . ./ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS ! '! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ()* + / CONCERNED CIT 4. + ( ) / THE CIT(A)-AHMEDABAD-5 5. ,-. '')* , )* , ( / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. .01 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, , ' //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 12.3.20 (DICTATION-PAD 4-P AGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER ..12.3.20 3. OTHER MEMBER... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S.13.3.20 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 13.3.20 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER