VARUN SHIPPING CO.LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT 5(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2126/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 129 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9797 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 9 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Next Hearing Date: 26-12-2022
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 26-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Liquidation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "J" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 2126/MUM/2017 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s Varun Shipping Company Limited, Laxmi Building, 6, Shoorji Vallabhdas- Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 [PAN: AAACV1658C] Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 5(3)(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400021 .................. Vs ................ Appellant Respondent Appearances For the Appellant/Assessee For the Respondent/Department : : None Shri Samuel Pitta Date of conclusion of hearing Date of pronouncement of order : : 27.12.2022 17.01.2023 O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: 1. By way of the present appeal the Appellant has challenged the order, dated 27.12.2016, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-58, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year 2011-12 whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal against the Assessment Order, dated 15.05.2015, passed under Section 143(3)(ii) read with Section 144C(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. When the appeal was taken for hearing none appeared for the Appellant. A perusal of order sheet shown that this has been the case for several hearings. In response to the query from IT(TP)A No. 2126//Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 2 the Bench, the Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the Appellant was succeeded by Varun Global Ltd. and Varun Resource Ltd. under scheme of amalgamation and both the aforesaid companies are undergoing liquidation. We note that the appeal was filed in 2017 and none has appeared on behalf of the Appellant since then. The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and/or the Official Liquidator (OL) have not come on record. The Memorandum of Appeal in Form No.36 available in our record is the one signed by the erstwhile Director of the Appellant. The IRP/OL have not impleaded themselves in the present proceedings before the Tribunal by filing revised Form No.36. Hence, the present appeal in the present form is not maintainable. In view of the aforesaid, we dismiss the present appeal as not maintainable with a liberty given to IRP/OL to prefer Miscellaneous Application along with revised Form No. 36, if so desired, within the time prescribed under law. 3. In the result, the present appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced on 17.01.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Prashant Maharishi) Accountant Member (Rahul Chaudhary) Judicial Member म ुंबई Mumbai; दिन ुंक Dated : 17.01.2023 Alindra, PS IT(TP)A No. 2126//Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 3 आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आय क्त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. आयकर आय क्त / CIT 5. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, म ुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आिेश न स र/ BY ORDER, सत्य दपि प्रदि //True Copy// उप/सह यक पुंजीक र /(Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, म ुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai