M/s Soundarya Promoters & Developers , Bangalore V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

ITA 2523/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4085 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 04-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR S PALANI KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SUJATHA D
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3); 234B; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO S . 2 523 TO 2525 /BANG/201 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 20 05 - 06, 2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09 M/S. SOUNDARYA PROMOTERS & DEVELOPERS, NO. 190, SOUNDARYA DAMINI, 4 TH PHASE, DOLLAR COLONY JP NAGAR, BANGALORE 560 016. PAN: ABFPS1679F VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : MISS SUJATHA .D, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : DR. S. PALANI KUMAR, ADDL. CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 1 7 . 10 .2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 . 10 .2018 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ALL THESE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE W HICH ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THREE SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD. CIT (A)-11, BANGALORE ALL DA TED 14.05.2018 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06, 2007-08 AND 2008-09. ALL THESE APPE ALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF THIS COMMON ORDER F OR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2005-06 IN ITA NO. 2523/BANG/2018 ARE AS UNDER. 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 14/05/2018, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 I S NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE ASSESSING AUTHOR ITY MADE ADDITIONS OF RS. 15,75,685/- IS NOT CORRECT, THE CIT(A) WITHO UT APPRECIATING THE FACT OF THE APPELLANT AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS M ADE BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY IS AGAINST THE LAW. HENCE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LAW. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE EXPARTE ASSESSME NT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY IS NOT CORRECT AND THE SAME IS CONSIDERED BY CIT(A) IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 6. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ASSE SSING AUTHORITY LEVIED TAX AND THE INTEREST LEVIED U/S 234B & 234C BY THE ASSESSING ITA NOS. 2523 TO 2525/BANG/2018 PAGE 2 OF 4 AUTHORITIES IS EXCESSIVE, ARBITRARY AND OUGHT TO BE DELETED. 7. FOR SUCH OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND IT IS PRAYS THAT KINDLY MAY ALLOW THE APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. 3. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2007-08 IN ITA NO. 2524/BANG/2018 ARE AS UNDER. 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 14/05/2018, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 I S NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE ASSESSING AUTHOR ITY MADE ADDITIONS OF RS.2,72,977/- IS NOT CORRECT, THE CIT(A) WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT OF THE APPELLANT AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS M ADE BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY IS AGAINST THE LAW. HENCE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LAW. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE EXPARTE ASSESSME NT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY IS NOT CORRECT AND THE SAME IS CONSIDERED BY CIT(A) IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 6. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ASSE SSING AUTHORITY LEVIED TAX AND THE INTEREST LEVIED U/S 234B & 234C BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITIES IS EXCESSIVE, ARBITRARY AND OUGHT TO BE DELETED. 7. FOR SUCH OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND IT IS PRAYS THAT KINDLY MAY ALLOW THE APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. 4. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2008-09 IN ITA NO. 2525/BANG/2018 ARE AS UNDER. 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 14/05/2018, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 I S NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE ASSESSING AUTHOR ITY MADE ADDITIONS OF RS.1,72,798/- IS NOT CORRECT, THE CIT(A) WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT OF THE APPELLANT AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS M ADE BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY IS AGAINST THE LAW. HENCE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LAW. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE EXPARTE ASSESSME NT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY IS NOT CORRECT AND THE SAME IS CONSIDERED BY CIT(A) IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. ITA NOS. 2523 TO 2525/BANG/2018 PAGE 3 OF 4 6. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ASSE SSING AUTHORITY LEVIED TAX AND THE INTEREST LEVIED U/S 234B & 234C BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITIES IS EXCESSIVE, ARBITRARY AND OUGHT TO BE DELETED. 7. FOR SUCH OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND IT IS PRAYS THAT KINDLY MAY ALLOW THE APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. 5. IT IS SEEN THAT ALL THESE THREE APPEALS WERE FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 04.09.2018 AND DEFECT MEMO HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE R EGISTRY POINTING OUT SEVERAL DEFECTS SUCH AS A) APPEALS ARE TIME-BARRED BY 51 DAYS B) GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A) NOT FILED C) COPIES OF ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 143(3) /153A IN DUPLICATE NOT FILED WITH THE APPEAL D) FORM 35 NOT FILED / NOT FILED IN DUPLICATE. 6. THESE APPEALS WERE FIRST FIXED FOR HEARING ON 24 .09.2018 AND LD. AR OF ASSESSEE SHRI MALLAHARAO .K, ADVOCATE APPEARED ON T HAT DATE AND MADE REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT AND FOR THE SAKE OF READY REFERENCE , HIS REQUEST LETTER FOR ADJOURNMENT IS REPRODUCED HEREINBELOW. THE UNDERSIGNED ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS BEFORE THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL T HAT, IN THE ABOVE CASE, THE UNDERSIGNED HAD ASKED CERTAIN DETAI LS IN SUPPORT OF THE APPELLANT CLAIM, WHICH ARE YET TO BE RECEIVED. HENCE, IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED, THAT THIS HON'BLE TRIBU NAL MAY KINDLY BE PLEASED TO ADJOURN THE ABOVE CASE AND GRA NT TIME OF TWO (2) WEEKS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. 6. CONSIDERING THE REQUEST OF THE LD. AR OF ASSESSE E, HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 17.10.2018. ON THIS DATE ALSO I.E. ON 17.10.201 8, LD. AR OF ASSESSEE AGAIN MADE A REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT AND FOR THE SA KE OF READY REFERENCE, THIS REQUEST LETTER DATED 17.10.2018 IS ALSO REPROD UCED HEREINBELOW. THE UNDERSIGNED ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS BEFORE THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL T HAT, IN THE ABOVE CASE, THE UNDERSIGNED HAD ASKED CERTAIN DETAI LS IN SUPPORT OF THE APPELLANT CLAIM, WHICH ARE YET TO BE RECEIVED. HENCE, IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED, THAT THIS HON'BLE TRIBU NAL MAY KINDLY BE PLEASED TO ADJOURN THE ABOVE CASE AND GRA NT TIME OF TWO (2) WEEKS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. ITA NOS. 2523 TO 2525/BANG/2018 PAGE 4 OF 4 7. AS PER THE FACTS NOTED ABOVE, IT IS SEEN THAT TH ERE ARE SEVERAL DEFECTS IN THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE I.E. AS PER DEFECT MEMO ISS UED BY THE REGISTRY CONTENTS OF WHICH ARE ALREADY NOTED ABOVE AND IN SP ITE OF THIS, ON BOTH THESE DATES I.E. 24.09.2018 AND 17.10.2018, THE LD. AR OF ASSESSEE HAS SIMPLY APPEARED AND MADE IDENTICAL REQUESTS FOR ADJOURNMEN T AND IN THOSE REQUESTS ALSO, THERE IS NOTHING REGARDING THESE ASP ECTS ON WHICH THE DEFECT MEMO WERE ISSUED. CONSIDERING ALL THESE FACTS, THE REQUEST OF LD. AR OF ASSESSEE FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS REJECTED AND THE APPEA LS WERE TAKEN AS HEARD BECAUSE THESE APPEALS ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF SEVERAL DEFECTS NOTED ABOVE. FOREMOST OF ALL THESE DEFECTS, IT IS SEEN THAT THESE APPEALS WERE FILED AFTER A DELAY OF 51 DAYS AND THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EVEN FILED ANY REQUEST FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILIN G THE APPEALS. FOR THE REMAINING DEFECTS ALSO IN THESE APPEALS, THERE IS N O WHISPER IN THE LETTERS OF LD. AR OF ASSESSEE AS REPRODUCED ABOVE. UNDER THES E FACTS, THESE APPEALS ARE NOT ADMITTED AND DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. 8. IN THE RESULT, ALL THESE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 26 TH OCTOBER, 2018. /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.