MULTITRADE P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 8(3)1, MUMBAI

ITA 3208/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0535 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 22-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T A KHAN LD
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3); 147; 148

Judgement Text

ITA NO.3208/MUM/2013 SAR MULTI TRADE PVT.LTD. ASSESSMENT YEAR-2006-2007 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM ./I.T.A. NO.3208/MUM/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) SAR MULTITRADE PRIVATE LTD. 7, PREM BHUVAN 243/246 2 ND FLOOR NARSHI NATHA STREET MASJID BUNDER MUMBAI 400 003 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 8(3) - 1 ROOM NO. 201 2 ND FLOOR M.K.ROAD AAYKAR BHAWAN MUMBAI - 4 00 0 20 ! ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. AAFCS-4119-J ( !# /APPELLANT ) : ( $%!# / RESPONDENT ) A SSESSEE BY : NONE RE VENUE BY : T.A.KHAN, LD. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 01/08/2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02 /08/2017 ITA NO.3208/MUM/2013 SAR MULTI TRADE PVT.LTD. ASSESSMENT YEAR-2006-2007 2 / O R D E R PER MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) 1. THE CAPTIONED APPEAL BY ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR [AY] 2006-07 ASSAILS THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX (APPEALS)-18 [CIT(A)], MUMBAI DATED 08/10/2012 QUA CERTAIN QUANTUM ADDITIONS SUFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE. NONE HAS APPEAR ED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND NO ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION IS ON RECOR D. THE RPAD NOTICES ISSUED HAS BEEN RETURNED BACK UNDELIVERED A ND THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT INTIMATED ANY CHANGE IN ADDRESS. SINCE, THE MATTER HAS BEEN ADJOURNED SEVERAL TIMES AS PER ORDER SHEET NOTING, THE SAME COULD NOT BE KEPT PENDING INDEFINITELY. THEREFORE, LEFT WITH NO OPTION, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE-OFF THE SAME AFTER HEARING LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 1.1 THE REGISTRY HAS NOTED THAT THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED WITH A DELAY OF 114 DAYS. NO AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE TOWARDS THE CONDONATION OF THE SAME. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A L ETTER SIMPLICITOR PRAYING FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AND ATTRIBUTED THE SAME CASUALLY TO ABSENCE OF DIRECTOR / CERTAIN ILLNESS FACED BY THE DIRECTOR AND CLOSURE OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY. HOWEVER, THE SAME IS NOT VERY CO NVINCING. 2. PROCEEDING ON MERITS, THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ASSE SSED U/S 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 FOR IMPUGNED AY ON 22/12/2011 AT RS.65,35,528/- AFTER ADDITION OF RS.59,53,268/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDI SCLOSED LABOR CHARGES / COMMISSION SHORT REFLECTED BY ASSESSEE IN BOOKS O F ACCOUNTS VIS--VIS TDS CERTIFICATES. THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 30/11/2006 ITA NO.3208/MUM/2013 SAR MULTI TRADE PVT.LTD. ASSESSMENT YEAR-2006-2007 3 AT RS.5,58,260/- WHICH WAS ASSESSED U/S 143(3) AT R S.5,82,260/-.THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED BY ISSUANCE OF NO TICE U/S 148 DATED 30/03/2011. 2.1 THE ASSESSEE REFLECTED COMMISSION INCOME OF RS. 12.97 LACS AND LABOR CHARGES OF RS.13.76 LACS IN HIS BOOKS OF ACCO UNTS WHEREAS THE SAME STOOD AT RS.52.22 LACS & RS.34.05 LACS RESPECT IVELY AS PER TDS CERTIFICATES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE SAME WA S CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE INCOME HAS BEEN SHOWN IN THE BOOKS AFTER NETTING OFF OF THE EXPENDITURE FROM RESPECTIVE HEADS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY DOCUMEN TARY EVIDENCES TO SUBSTANTIATE THE SAME WHICH LED THE LD. AO TO MA KE THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS OF RS.59.53 LACS IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSE SSEE. 3. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CONTESTED THE SAME WITHO UT ANY SUCCESS BEFORE LD. CIT(A) VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 08/10/2 012 AND REITERATED THE SAID CONTENTION WITHOUT ADDUCING ANY DOCUMENTAR Y EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED ONLY SELF-MADE VOUCHERS WITHOUT ANY SUPPORTING BILLS ETC. WHICH LED THE LD. CIT(A) TO DISMISS ASSESSEES APPEAL. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN AP PEAL BEFORE US. 4. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE [DR] SUPPORT ED THE STAND TAKEN BY LOWER AUTHORITIES AND CONTENDED THAT THE A MOUNT REFLECTED IN THE TDS CERTIFICATES WAS QUITE HIGHER VIS--VIS AMO UNT REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE C OULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SAME AND MADE MERE BALD ASSERTIONS THAT THE NET INCOME HAS BEEN SHOWN AFTER ADJUSTING EXPENSES THERE-FROM. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE CONTENTIONS. AS STATED ABOVE, THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED WITH A DELAY OF 114 DAYS WHICH HAS NOT B EEN EXPLAINED ITA NO.3208/MUM/2013 SAR MULTI TRADE PVT.LTD. ASSESSMENT YEAR-2006-2007 4 CONVINCINGLY. SECONDLY, THE ONUS TO RECONCILE THE F IGURES SQUARELY FELL ON THE ASSESSEE WHICH HE HAS FAILED TO DO SO. THEREFOR E, WE SEE NO REASONS TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDERS / FINDINGS / C ONCLUSIONS OF LD. CIT(A). 6. RESULTANTLY, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02 ND AUGUST, 2017. SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 02.08.2017 SR.PS:- THIRUMALESH / 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 FILE / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI