P K INTERNATIONAL EXPORTS LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 8(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 327/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9461 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D P HAOKIP
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

, L LL LH HH H INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI - C BENCH. , ! , BEFORE S/SH.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEM BER & RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /. ITA NO.327/MUM/2015, ' ' ' ' # # # # / ASSESSMENT YEAR-2007-08 P.K. INTERNATION AL EXPORTS LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS P.K. INTERNATIONAL EXPORTS P. LTD.), D- 211, CRYSTAL PLAZA, LINK ROAD, ANDHERI (W), MUMBAI-400058 PAN:AAECP0793N VS ITO WARD 8(2)(4), 2ND FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI-20 ( $% / APPELLANT) ( &'$% / RESPONDENT) /. ITA NO.328/MUM/2015, ' ' ' ' # # # # / ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-11 P.K. INTERNATIONAL EXPORTS LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS P.K. INTERNATIONAL EXPORTS P. LTD.), D- 211, CRYSTAL PLAZA, LINK ROAD, ANDHERI (W), MUMBAI-400058 PAN:AAECP0793N VS DCIT 8(1)(OSD), 2ND FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI-20 '() '() '() '() * * * * / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HARIDAS BHAT + * / REVENUE BY : SHRI D.P. HAOKIP ' ' ' ' + ++ + ), ), ), ), / DATE OF HEARING : 12-03-2015 -.# + ), / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12-03-2015 ' ' ' '1961 1961 1961 1961 + + + + 254 254 254 254( (( (1 11 1) )) ) )7) )7) )7) )7) 8 8 8 8 ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961(ACT) PER RAJENDRA,AM ! ! ! ! ' ' ' ' : CHALLENGING THE ORDERS DATED 07.01.2014 OF CIT(A)-1 7,MUMBAI THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR THE ABOVE MENTIONED TWO ASSES SMENT YEARS(AY.S.): ITA/327/MUM/2015 AY-2007-08 GROUND NO.1. 1.ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, AND IN LAW, HON'BLE CIT(A) -17, ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED REJECTING THE SUFFICIEN T CAUSE WHICH HAS RESULTED IN DELAY IN FILING OF TH E APPEAL. 2.ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT A) THE APPEAL FILED WAS ONLY DEFECTIVE AND NOT VOID . B) THE APPELLANT DELAYED THE FILING OF THE APPEAL D UE TO SUFFICIENT AND REASONABLE CAUSE, WHICH WAS PROVED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND AN AFFIDAVIT. C) THE CIT(A)- 17 HEARD THE ASSESSEE NUMBER OF TIME S, CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT, GAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO RESPOND TO THE R EMAND REPORT, WHICH GAVE THE IMPRESSION TO THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DEFECT IS CONDO NED. D) THE CIT(A) COMPLETELY IGNORED THE SUBMISSIONS, R EMAND REPORT OF THE AO AND APPELLANT'S SUBMISSIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME. 3. THE APPELLANT THEREFORE PRAYS THAT THE APPEAL MA Y PLEASE BE DECIDED ON MERITS. GROUND NO.2 2 ITA NO. 327 & 328/M/2015 P.K. INTERNATIONAL EXPORTS LTD. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE GROUND NO. I 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, HON'BLE CIT (A)- 17, ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE HON'BLE CIT (A) AND LD. AO FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT:- A) THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S143(3) AND TRAVE LLED UPTO CIT(A) BEFORE REACHING FINALITY. B) THE AO HAS MADE ADDITIONS ON THE ISSUES WHICH WE RE NOT THE SUBJECT MATTER OF 263. C) THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE U/S 144, DUE TO NON ATTE NDANCE, THE ISSUES WHICH WERE COVERED BY THE ORDER U/S 263 WAS REMANDED BY CIT(A) , AND THE ISSUES WERE CLARIFIED TO THE AO DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS, AND THE AO HAS CO MMENTED ON THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, GIVING THE PARTICULARS OF SUPPORTING DOCU MENTS SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THE ISSUES. 3. THE APPELLANT THEREFORE PRAYS THAT THE ADDITIONS MADE OF RS 11,05,70760/- MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND OR DELETE ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. ITA/328/MUM/2015 AY-2007-08 1.ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, AND IN LAW, HON'BLE CIT(A) -17, ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED REJECTING THE SUFFICIEN T CAUSE WHICH HAS RESULTED IN DELAY IN FILING OF TH E APPEAL. 2.ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT A) THE APPEAL FILED WAS ONLY DEFECTIVE AND NOT VOID . B) THE APPELLANT DELAYED THE FILING OF THE APPEAL D UE TO SUFFICIENT AND REASONABLE CAUSE, WHICH WAS PROVED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND AN AFF IDAVIT. C) THE CIT(A)- 17 HEARD THE ASSESSEE NUMBER OF TIME S, CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT, GAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO RESPOND TO THE R EMAND REPORT, WHICH GAVE THE IMPRESSION TO THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DEFECT IS CONDO NED. D) THE CIT(A) COMPLETELY IGNORED THE SUBMISSIONS, R EMAND REPORT OF THE AO AND ASSESSEE'S SUBMISSIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME. 3. THE APPELLANT THEREFORE PRAYS THAT THE APPEAL MA Y PLEASE BE DECIDED ON MERITS. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE GROUND NO. I 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, AND IN LAW, HON'BLE CIT(A)- 17, ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE HON'BLE CIT (A) AND LD. AO FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE U/S 144, DU E TO NON ATTENDANCE, ALL THE ISSUES WERE CLARIFIED TO THE AO DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS, AND THE AO HAS AGREED ON THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND GAVE HER COMMENTS, EXPRESSLY COMME NTING ON THE DELETION OF THE ADDITIONS IN ALL IMPORTANT ISSUES. 3. THE APPELLANT THEREFORE PRAYS THAT THE ADDITIONS MADE OF RS. 10,50,68,104/- MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND OR DELETE ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US,AUTHORISED R EPRESENTATIVE (AR) OF THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING TH E APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY (FAA)WAS FILED BEFORE HIM ALONG WITH THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY,THAT IT WAS STATED IN THE APPLICATION AS WELL AS THE AFFIDAVIT THAT ONE OF THE DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY, LOOKING AFTER THE FINANCIAL AND LEGAL MATTERS HAD GONE TO U SA FOR MEDICAL TREATMENT,THAT MEDICAL DOCUMENTS WERE ALSO SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THE AFFIDA VIT, THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME, THAT THE FAA HAD DELETED THE PENALTY IN ANOTHER CASE OF THE ASSESSEE,AFTER OBTAINING THE REMAND REPORT F ROM THE AO,THOUGH THERE WAS ALSO DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL.DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR) LEFT THE MATTER TO THE DISCRETION OF THE BENCH. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL BEFORE US. WE FIND THAT THE FAA 3 ITA NO. 327 & 328/M/2015 P.K. INTERNATIONAL EXPORTS LTD. HAD NOT DECIDED THE ISSUE ON MERITS AND HAD DISMISS ED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL IN TIME.WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY ONE OF THE DIRECTORS AND THE APPLICATION FILED BEFORE THE AO FOR CONDONING THE D ELAY. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE PAPERS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO ILLNESS OF ONE OF THE DIRECTORS.CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE,WE ARE OF THE O PINION THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL IN TIME.THEREFORE, IN THE INTERES T OF JUSTICE,WE ARE REMITTING BACK THE MATTER TO TH E FILE OF THE FAA TO DECIDE THE MATTER ON MERITS. HE IS DIRECTED TO AFFORD A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE.EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEAL IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, IN PART. ITA NO.328/MUM/2015,AY.2002-03: AS THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE YEAR UNDER C ONSIDERATION REMAIN SAME AS THAT OF THE AY. 2007-08,INCLUDING THE OBTAINING OF REMAND REPORT AN D DISMISSING THE PENALTY APPEAL IN A CASE WHERE THE APPEAL WAS FILED BEYOND PRESCRIBED TIME L IMIT.IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE,WE ARE REMITTING BACK THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE FAA FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL ALSO,SO THAT ISSUES RAISED BEFORE COULD BE DECIDED ON MERITS.HE IS DIRECTED TO AFFORD A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. AS A RESULT APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSES SEE FOR BOTH THE AY.S. STAND PARTLY ALLOWED. 9): '() ; < + 7 NKSUKSA NKSUKSA NKSUKSA NKSUKSA SA 8): = + ) >?. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12TH, MARCH,2015 . 8 + -.# A B' 12 EKPZ , 201 5 . + 7 C SD/- SD/- ( / VIJAY PAL RAO) ( ! ! ! ! / RAJENDRA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / MUMBAI, B' /DATE: 12.03 . 2015. SK 8 8 8 8 + ++ + &) &) &) &) D #) D #) D #) D #) / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE / $% 2. RESPONDENT / &'$% 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ E F , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / E F 5. DR C BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / G7 &)' L LL LH HH H , . . . 6. GUARD FILE/ 7 9 ') ') ') ') &) &)&) &) //TRUE COPY// 8' / BY ORDER, H / > DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , /ITAT, MUMBAI