SCREEN CATALYST P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 4(3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 3531/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8822 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 13-09-2012
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR MANJUNATH KANKIHALLI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL (J.M.) AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA (A.M.) ITA NO. 3531/MUM /2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S SCREEN CATALYST PVT. LTD., UNIT NO. 32, JAFFERBHOY INDL. ESTATE, MAKWANA ROAD, MAROL, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI 400 059. PAN AARCS 4934 K VS. I.T.O - 4(3)(4), 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 20. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : DR. MANJUNATH KANKIHALLI DATE OF HEARING 13-9-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 26-9-2012 O R D E R PER DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL, J.M. THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DTD. 23-02-2011 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) 8, MUMBA I FOR THE A.Y. 2005- 06. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE CA SE, THEREFORE, IT WAS DECIDED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EX PARTE, QUA THE ASSESSEE, ON MERITS, AFTER HEARING THE LD. D.R. ITA NO. 3531/MUM/2011 2 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AS SESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING OF SILVER WIRE MESH AND REFINING ON JOB WORK BASIS. THE RETURN OF INCOME W AS FILED DECLARING LOSS OF RS. 1,73,824/-. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMP LETED AT AN INCOME OF RS. 1,33,520/- VIDE ORDER DTD. 17-10-2007 PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT). ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DELAYED BY 19 D AYS. ON BEING ASKED IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DELAY IN FIL ING THE APPEAL WAS CAUSED AS THE ORDER WAS RECEIVED LATE DUE TO CHANGE OF ADDRESS OF THE REGISTERED OFFICE WHEREAS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BEEN SENT AT THE OLD ADDRESS. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE OBSERVING T HAT THE APPELLANT DOES NOT EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPE AL, DID NOT CONDONE THE DELAY AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) T HE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US CHALLENGING IN BOTH THE GROUNDS TH E DENIAL OF CONDONATION OF DELAY AND THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A ) BE RESTORED TO HIS FILE. 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. D.R. SUPPORTS THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF T HE LD. D.R. AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND T HAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE DELAY, IF ANY, IS OF 19 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS ITA NO. 3531/MUM/2011 3 SENT AT THE OLD ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS R ECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE LATE DUE TO CHANGE OF ADDRESS OF THE REGIS TERED OFFICE OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONTRARY M ATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE RATIO OF THE DECISION OF THE HO NBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION V. MST. KAT IJI AND OTHERS (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN INTER ALIA HE LD THAT A JUSTIFIABLY LIBERAL APPROACH HAS TO BE ADOPTED ON PRINCIPLE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND SEND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH ON MERIT AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUN ITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE ARE , THEREFORE, ALLOWED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS ALLO WED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 26-9-2012 SD/- (N.K. BILLAIYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- (DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED : 26-9-2012. RK ITA NO. 3531/MUM/2011 4 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 8, MUMBAI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4, MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH E, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI ITA NO. 3531/MUM/2011 5 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 13-9-12 18-9-12 SR PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR ON SR PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACE BEFORE THE 2 ND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY 2 ND MEMBER JM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR PS SR.PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR PS 7 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR PS 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 10 DATE OF DESPATCH SR PS