JAYLON IMPEX INDIA P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2956/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 295619914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Next Hearing Date: 26-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 15-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: V V MEHENDALE
• Section: 68; 6

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL I BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.PADVEKAR (JM) AND SHRI RAJENDRA SI NGH(AM) ITA NO.2956/M/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 M/S. JAYLON IMPEX INDIA PVT. LTD. THE ACIT CIRCLE 4(2), 6 TH FLOOR, 1 ST FLOOR, OFFICE NO.6, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. MARG 439, KALBADEVI ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020. MUMBAI 400 002. APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI V.V.MEHENDALE REVENUE BY : SHRI S.K. SINGH O R D E R PER RAJENDRA SINGH (AM) THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 27.1.2010 OF CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 . THE DISPUTE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL RELATE TO ADDITIONS MAD E UNDER SECTION 68 AND 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. IN ADDITION THE A SSESSEE HAS ALSO RAISED THE ISSUE OF LACK OF OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BY THE CIT( A). 2. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THE AO HAD MADE ADDITION OF RS.11,20,000/- UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT ON ACCOUNT O F SHARE CAPITAL RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR. HE HAS ALSO MADE ADDITION OF RS.16 ,687/- UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. IN APPEAL CIT(A) O BSERVED THAT DESPITE SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT APPEARED FOR HEA RING OF THE CASE. HE 2 THEREFORE CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE AO AGGRIEVED B Y WHICH THE PRESENT APPEAL HAD BEEN FILED. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES IN THE MATTER. TH E APPELLATE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED EX-PARTE. THE CIT(A) HAS ONLY CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF AO. HE HAS NOT PASSED A REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDER WHICH HE I S REQUIRED TO DO EVEN WHEN THE ORDER IS PASSED EX-PARTE. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO NOT BEEN HEARD. THEREFORE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE DEEM IT PRO PER THAT THE MATTER BE RESTORED TO CIT(A) FOR PASSING A FRESH AND SPEAKING ORDER AFTER ALLOWING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORD INGLY THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO CIT(A). 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY I.E. ON 26.04.2011. SD/- SD/- ( R.S. PADVEKAR ) (RAJEND RA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE : 26.04.2011 AT :MUMBAI COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI CONCERNED 4. THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED 5. THE DR I BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI // TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI ALK 3