BERNHARD SCHULTE SHIPPING (INDIA ) P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT 10(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2366/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2749 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 5 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 10-04-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANUPAMA SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD , JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 2366/M/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 ) BERNHARD SCHULTE SHIPPING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, 401, OLYMPIA, 4 TH FLOOR, HIRANANDANI GARDENS, POWAI, MUMBAI 400 076. / VS. ACIT - 10(3), 4 TH FLOOR, ROOM NO. 473, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI 400 020. ./ PAN : AABCB7797H ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.R.V. RAGHAVAN / RESPONDENT BY : MISS ANUPAMA SINGH, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 08.09 .2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 .09 .2016 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 10.4.2012 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 22, MUMBAI DATED 9.2.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010. IN THIS APPEAL ASSESSEE RAISED TWO MAIN GROUNDS WHICH READ AS UNDER: - 1. THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT CONSIDERING AND NOT DISPOSING OFF THE GROUND NO.1 (III) OF YOUR APPELLANT IN HIS APPELLATE ORDER DATED FEB.9.2012. 2. (I) THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT CONSIDERING AND NOT DISPOSING OFF THE GROUND NO.2(II) OF YOUR APPELLANTS. (II) THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN STATING VIDE PARAGRAPHS 3.2 AT PAGE 3 OF HIS ORDER, THAT DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLANT PROCEEEINGS IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT AO HAD NEVER ASKED FOR ANY BILLS AND VOUCHERS FO R LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL FEES. FURTHER, APPELLANT HAD ALSO REQUESTED FOR ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BUT WAS NOT PROVIDED SO, WHEN IN FACT THE LAPSE ON THE PART OF THE AO IN DOING SO, WAS BROUGHT THE CIT (A). (III) THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HIS STATEMENT AT PARAGRAPH 3.2 AT PAGE 3 OF HIS ORDER BY NOT CONSIDERING AND NOT DISPOSING OFF THE GROUND NO.2 (II) OF YOUR APPELLANTS WHICH SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT THE LEARNED ACIT HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DISALLOWING THE ABOVE AMOUNT OF RS. 14,94,176/ - WITHOUT ASKING ANY DOCUMENTARY SUPPORT AND HENCE, DENIED YOUR APPELLANTS NATURAL JUSTICE. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO ABOVE GROUNDS AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE GROUNDS RELATES TO THE ALLOCATION OF COST TO HOUSE PROPERTY INCOME QUA THE INSURANCE COSTS AND THE LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL FEES. IN THIS REGARD, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON 1.9.2015 AND MENTIONED IT CONTAINS 1048 PAGES AND THE SAME ARE FILED FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND NOT BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. THOUGH THERE IS NO PRAYER IN THE COVERING LETTER OF THE PAPER BOOK, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THEY ARE FILED FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE US AN D PRAYED FOR ADMITTING THE SAME AND REMANDING THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 3. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON GOING THROUGH THE PAPER BOOK FILED BEFORE US, WE FIND, THE SAID ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE CONSTITUTES AN USEFUL INFORMATION WHICH GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER PENDING FOR ADJUDICATION BEFORE US. CONSIDERING THE IMPORTANCE, WE ADMIT THE SAID ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND DIRECT THE AO TO MAKE USE OF THE S AME IN MAKING ASSESSMENT PROPERL Y. AO SHALL GRANT A REASONABLE OP PORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUN CED IN THE OP EN COURT ON 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2016. SD/ - SD/ - ( RAVISH SOOD ) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 23 .9 .2016 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI