M/S.MEHULKUMAR RAMESHKUMAR & CO., MUMBAI V. DCIT CC-2(4), MUMBAI

ITA 2223/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3471 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 08-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 153A; 250; 143(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 2223, 2224 & 2225/Mum/2018 (A.Ys: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2011-12) M/s Mehulkumar Rameshkumar & Co. Round Floor, Lata Kunj, 2 nd Floor Wadi, Mumbai – 400002 Vs DCIT, CC-2(4) Mumbai ./ज आइआर ./PAN/GIR No. : AAUFM9265D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Mr.Sidharth Kothari.AR Respondent by : Mr.T.Shankar .DR Date of Hearing 27.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement 28.04.2022 आद श / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-48, Mumbai passed u/s 143(3) and 250 of the Act. At the time of hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there is a delay in filing the appeals before the Hon’ble Tribunal and filed the affidavit for condonation of delay. We found the facts mentioned in ITA No. 2223 to 2225/Mum/2022 M/s Mehulkumar Rameshkumar & Co., Mumbai. - 2 - the affidavit are reasonable. Contra, the Ld.DR has no specific objections. Accordingly we condone the delay and admit the appeals. Since the issues in these three appeals are common and identical, hence they are clubbed, heard and consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience we shall take up assessee appeal in ITA No. 2225/Mum/2018, for A.Y 2011-12 as a lead case and facts narrated. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of money transfer and courier services. There was a search and seizure operations u/s 132 of the Act was conducted at the premises of assessee and others. The assessee has filed the return of electronically on 07.03.2013 declaring the total income of Rs. 1,15,010/-. Subsequently the A.O. has issued the notice u/s 153A of the Act on the assessee. The assessee has filed a letter on 09.09.2014 to consider the return of income filed on 07.03.2013 as a due compliance. Subsequently the A.O issued notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act on the assessee. In compliance the Ld. AR of the assessee appeared from ITA No. 2223 to 2225/Mum/2022 M/s Mehulkumar Rameshkumar & Co., Mumbai. - 3 - time to time and filed the details and the case was discussed. The A.O dealt exhaustively on the facts of courier services and transfer of money and made estimation of income as undisclosed commission of the assessee of Rs. 92,16,000/- and assessed the total income of the assessee of Rs. 93,31,010/- passed order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act on 26.03.2015. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A). Whereas at the time of hearing none appeared in the appellate proceedings, therefore the CIT(A) relied on the findings of the A.O. and has dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order and prayed for an opportunity of hearing to substantiate the case on merits with the evidences before the appellate authority. Contra, the Ld. DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has ITA No. 2223 to 2225/Mum/2022 M/s Mehulkumar Rameshkumar & Co., Mumbai. - 4 - passed the ex-parte order considering the fact that there is no appearance nor any submissions are filed by the assessee in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex- parte confirming the action of the assessing officer. We on perusal of the CIT(A) found that the Ld.CIT(A) has issued the notices of hearing referred at page 2 of the order, but there was no response and thus the Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not inclined to prosecute the appeal. 6. We find that, the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the additions by the A.O. and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. We considering the principles of natural justice shall provide one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case along with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the entire disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate ITA No. 2223 to 2225/Mum/2022 M/s Mehulkumar Rameshkumar & Co., Mumbai. - 5 - in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal and allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA.No.2223 & 2224/Mum/2018, A.Y 2012-13&2013-14 8. As the facts and circumstances in these appeals are identical to ITA No.2225/Mum/2018 for the A.Y.2011-12 except the variance in figures. Therefore, the decision rendered in above paragraphs would apply mutatis mutandis for this appeal also. Accordingly, the disputed issues are restored to the CIT(A) on similar directions and grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 9. In the result, the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.04.2022 Sd/- Sd/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 28.04.2022 ITA No. 2223 to 2225/Mum/2022 M/s Mehulkumar Rameshkumar & Co., Mumbai. - 6 - KRK, PS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A) 4. Concerned CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file.() आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, //True Copy// 1. ( Asst. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai