NANDARAJ DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI V. ITO, WD-8(2)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2991/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0892 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POOJA SWAROOP

Judgement Text

IN THE INC OME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN , AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM ./ I.T.A. NO . 2991 & 2992 /MUM/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09 ) NANDRAJ DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. 410, MORYA SHALIMAR PARK, ANDHERI MALAD LINK ROAD, ANDHERI (W) MUMBAI - 400 053 . / VS. ITO, WD - 8(2)(3) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 0 20 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. A A AC N9915A ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENTBY : MS. POOJA SWAROOP / DATE OF HEARING : 23/01 /201 8 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23/01/2018 / O R D E R PER BENCH : THE PRESENT TWO APPEAL S HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISS I ONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 17 , MUMBAI , DATED 20.11.2015 FOR A.Y. 2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09 RESPECTIVELY . 2 ITA NO. 2991 & 2992 /MUM/2016 NANDRAJ DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. 2. SINCE THE ISSUE S RAISED IN THESE TWO APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL, THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THESE TWO APPEALS ARE CLUBBED, HEARD AND DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, IT IS NOTICED THAT NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF SEVERAL CALLS AND EVEN NO APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS MOVED. ON THE OTHER HAND L D. DR IS PRESENT I N THE COURT AND IS READY WITH ARGUMENTS. THEREFORE WE HAVE DECIDED TO PROCEED WITH THE HEARING OF THE CASE EX - PA RTE WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE L D. DR AND THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. 4 . THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT BOTH THE ABOVE MENTIONED APPEA LS PERTAINS TO UPHOLD ING THE ORDER OF LEVY OF PENALTY BY LD. CIT(A). LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEALS BY NOT CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL I.E. FOR AY 2007 - 08 (THERE WAS DELAY OF 364 DAYS ) AND IN APPEAL I.E. FOR AY 2008 - 09 ( THERE WAS DELAY OF 1 0 10 DAYS) RESPECTIVELY . LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUB MISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES, HE LD THAT THERE WAS NO MATERIAL ADDUCED BY THE ASSESSEE TO SUCCESSFULLY DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE WAS NO NEGLIGENT , INACTION OR WANT O F DUE DILIGENCE INVOLVED IN BELATELY FILING OF BOTH THE APPEAL S AND EVEN NO SUFFICIENT CAUSE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE INORDINATE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL S . 3 ITA NO. 2991 & 2992 /MUM/2016 NANDRAJ DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. 5. WE HAVE HEARD LD. DR AND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD AS WE LL AS THE ORDERS PASSED BY REVENUE AUTHORITIES. EVEN BEFORE US, NO NEW FACTS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE IN ORDER TO CONTROVERT OR REBUT THE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE LD.CIT (A). MOREOVER, THERE ARE NO REASONS FOR US TO DEVIATE FROM THE FINDINGS SO RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT (A). THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE FINDINGS SO RECO R DED BY THE LD. CIT (A) ARE JUDICIOUS AND ARE WELL REASONED. ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE SAME. 6 . IN THE NET RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 RD JAN , 201 8 . SD/ - SD/ - ( B. R. BASKARAN ) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 23 . 01 .201 8 SR. PS. DHANANJAY / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT - CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD F I L E / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMB A I