C.P. ASSOCIATES, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 21(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2340/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 234019914 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 30-12-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 25-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEIL PHLIP
• Assessee Lawyers: AJAY SINGH; ALOK BAURAGAVA

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HONBLE S/SHRI H.L. KARWA, PRESIDENT AND B. R.BASKARAN (AM) . . , . . , ./ I.T.A. NO.2340/MUM/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009-10) C P ASSOCIATES, BHAGWANT NIWAS, 7 TH RAMBAUG, OPP.DAWOOD BAUG LANE, VERSOVA ROAD, ANDHERI(W), MUMBAI-400058 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 21 (1)(1), MUMBAI. ( / APPELLANT) .. ( ! / RESPONDENT) ./ #$ ./ PAN/GIRNO.:AAFFC2311P % / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AJAY SINGH AND SHRI ALOK BAURAGAVA ! & % /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NEIL PHLIP. ' ( & ) * / DATE OF HEARING : 30.12.2014 +, & ) * /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.12.2014 / O R D E R PER B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31. 12.2012 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-32, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER EX-PARTE, SINCE THE A SSESSEE COULD NOT PRESENT BEFORE HIM AT THE TIME OF HEARING. THE LD..COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE SOME IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE TAXING AUTHORITIES AND THE CONSIDERATION OF ALL THESE DOCUMENTS IS ESSENTIAL F OR PROPER ADJUDICATION OF THE ITA NO.2340/M/13 2 GROUND URGED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, T HE LD AR PRAYED THAT THE ENTIRE MATTERS MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LD CIT(A) FO R FRESH ADJUDICATION. 3.. THE LD. DR DID NOT OBJECT TO THE PLEA PUT FORTH BY THE LD. AR. 4. WE NOTICE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORD ER EX-PARTE ORDER WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUS TICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HEAR THE ASSESSEE AFRESH, AF TER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY. ACCORDINGLY TO LD A.R, SOME DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONSIDERED BY LD CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) AND RESTORE ALL THE MATTERS TO HIS FILE WITH THE DIRECT ION TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL AFRESH BY DULY CONSIDERING ALL THE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS, I F ANY, THAT MAY BE FURNISHED BEFORE HIM BY THE ASSESSEE. WE ALSO DIRECT THE AS SESSEE TO FULLY CO-OPERATE WITH THE LD CIT(A). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ABOVE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OP EN COURT ON 30.12.2014. +, ' - ./ 0 1 30.12.2014 , & 2( 3 SD S D ( . . / H.L. KARWA) ( . . , / B.R. BASKARAN ) / PRESIDENT / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . ' ( MUMBAI: 30.12.2014. . . ./ SRL , SR. PS ITA NO.2340/M/13 3 ! ' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. ! / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ' 7) ( ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED 4. ' 7) / CIT CONCERNED 5. 6. 89 2 ): , * : , . ' ( / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED 2 ; < ( / GUARD FILE. = ' / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY > # (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) * : , . ' ( /ITAT, MUMBAI