, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES B, MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.2276/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 DCIT-2(2), R. NO.545, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400020 / VS. M/S MIRACLE SHIPPING AGENCIES PVT. LTD. B/101-105, SAGAR TECH PLAZA, ANDHERI-KURLA ROAD, SAKINAKA, ANDHERI (WEST), MUMBAI-400072 ( / REVENUE) ( !' # /ASSESSEE) P.A. NO. AACM7606H / REVENUE BY DR. YOGESH KAMAT-DR !' # / ASSESSEE BY NONE $ % & # ' / DATE OF HEARING : 22/06/2015 & # ' / DATE OF ORDER: 24/07/2015 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DAT ED 14/12/2012 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI, ON THE GROUND THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX M/S MIRACLE SHIPPING AGENCIES PVT. LTD ITA NO.2276/MUM/2013 2 (APPEALS) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE UN-RECONCILED ENTRIES OF ITS DATA AS PER PARAGR APH 3.4 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OR LOOKING THE CRUCIAL FACT T HAT WITH EFFECT FROM 01/06/2001, SETTING ASIDE IS NOT PERMIS SIBLE AS PER THE AMENDED PROVISION, IGNORING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(4) OF THE ACT. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, THE LD. DR, DR. YOGESH KAMAT, ADVANCED HIS ARGUMENTS WHICH ARE IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND RAISED. NOBODY WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF ISSUANCE OF RPAD NOTICE. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE NOTE T HAT THIS APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE REVENUE ON 21/03/2013 AND W AS ADJOURNED ON VARIOUS DATES DUET TO VARIOUS REASONS. REGISTERED NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASS ESSEE DID NOT APPEAR. WE HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO PROCEED EX -PARTY, QUA THE ASSESSEE, AND TEND TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEA L ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THA T WHILE ADJUDICATING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS CLA IMED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT, SUFFICI ENT OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. REMAN D REPORT WAS SOUGHT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHERE IN, REPORT DATED 01/11/2012, IT WAS CLAIMED THAT SUFFIC IENT OPPORTUNITY WAS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO RECONCI LE THE AMOUNT REPORTED IN AIR INFORMATION AND IN THE ABSEN CE OF ANY DETAILS, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED. THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED THAT COPIES OF LEDGER ACCOUNT ALONGWITH R ECEIPTS, M/S MIRACLE SHIPPING AGENCIES PVT. LTD ITA NO.2276/MUM/2013 3 ETC. THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE DATED 06/08/2012 HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISH THE DETAILS A S MENTIONED IN PARA 3.2 OF THE ORDER. WITH RESPECT T O THE AMOUNT OF RS. 14,68,122/-, THE ADDITION WAS UPHELD AND FOR REMAINING FIGURES OF RS.11,91,494/-, THE ASSESS ING OFFICER WAS DIRECTED TO VERIFY THE FACTS AND AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, THE CASE BE DECIDE D ON MERIT. IN VIEW OF THIS FACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUS TICE AND FAIR PLAY, SUCH DIRECTION WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSING OF FICER. WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN SUCH DIRECTIONS, BECAUSE IT IS NOT A SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUE RATHER IN THE INTEREST OF J USTICE, JUSTIFIABLY, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) ASK THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF T HE ASSESSEE AND TO VERIFY THE UN-RECONCILED ENTRIES. WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE CLAIM OF THE REVENUE. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. DR ON 22/06/2015. SD/ - (RAJENDRA) SD/ - (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER $ % MUMBAI; ( DATED : 24/07/2015 F{X~{T? P.S/. . . %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *+,- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./,- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 0 0 $ 1# ( *+ ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. 0 0 $ 1# / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI M/S MIRACLE SHIPPING AGENCIES PVT. LTD ITA NO.2276/MUM/2013 4 5. 34 .# , 0 *+' * 5 , $ % / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 6! 7% / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, /3+# .# //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , $ % / ITAT, MUMBAI