BUNTS INDUSTRIES P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ACIT 10(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2767/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 276719914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-05-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 08-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P C MOURYA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI B BENCH BEFORE SHRI G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA, PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2767/M/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 BUNTS INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., 210, ANANDRAJ INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, LBS ROAD, SONAPUR, BHANDUP (W), MUMBAI 400 078. PAN: AACCB 5692C . APPELLANT VS. ASST. C.I.T-10(3), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI 400 020. . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI P.C. MOURYA DATE OF HEARING: 15.5.2012 DATE OF ORDER:15.6.20 12 ORDER PER S.S. GODARA, JM: THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL CHALLENGES LD. CIT (A) ORDER CONFIRMING PENALTY U/S 271 (1)(C) OF THE ACT REGARDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT CIT ( A) HAS DISMISSED HIS APPEAL WITHOUT ADVERTING TO FACTS AND NATURE OF THE GROUNDS RAISED , THAT TOO, BY A TOTALLY NON-SPEAKING ORDER. 3. AS WE SEE FROM LD CIT (A) ORDER WHOSE OPERATIVE PART READS AS UNDER: IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS ABOVE IT HAS BEEN SIMPL Y BEEN REQUESTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMANDED TO THE AO AND OPPOR TUNITY MAY BE AFFORDED. HOWEVER, BEFORE ME THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT B ROUGHT ON RECORD THE 2 ITA NO. 2767/M/2011 REASONABLE CAUSE BECAUSE OF WHICH IT FAILED TO FU RNISH THE DETAILS CALLED FOR BY THE AO. EVEN IN THE LETTER DATED 28.1.2011 NO S UCH SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN MADE. IN VIEW OF THIS, I AM OF THE OPINION TH AT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT HAVING ANY REASONABLE CAUSE FOR GIVING ONE MORE OPP ORTUNITY AND HENCE THE FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ARE UPHELD. EVEN ON MERIT, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY DETAILED SUBMISSIONS WIT H REGARD TO THE ADDITIONS MADE. HENCE, I HAVE NO REASON TO DEVIATE WITH THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT NOWHERE STATES THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, DE CISION THEREON OR REASONS IN SUPPORT THEREOF AS PROVIDED U/S 250(6) OF THE ACT. 4. ALTHOUGH NOBODY HAS TURNED UP ON ASSESSEES BEHA LF, BUT WE HAVE HEARD LD DR. THE ORDER OF CIT (A) IS TOO CRYPTIC. APART FROM BEING NON-SPEAKING ORDER, IT NOWHERE STATES POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, DECISION THEREON WITH REA SONS IN SUPPORT AS REQUIRED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. 5. THEREFORE, WE HAVE NO HESITATION IN SETTING ASID E THE CIT (A)S ORDER AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO HIM WITH A DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE A PPEAL ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.6.2012. SD/- SD/- (G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA) (S.S. GODARA) PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 15.6.2012 AT :MUMBAI OKK COPY TO : 1. BUNTS INDUSTRIES P. LTD., MUMBAI. 2. ACIT-10(3), MUMBAI. 3. THE CIT (A)-22, MUMBAI. 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR B, BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI. 6. GUARD FILE. 3 ITA NO. 2767/M/2011 // TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI