SULZER PUMPS INDIA LTD, NAVI MUMBAI V. ASST CIT 10(3), MUMBAI

ITA 3668/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 366819914 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 18-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEIL PHILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: HEENA DOSHI
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH E, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.3668/M/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 M/S. SULZER PUMPS INDIA LTD., 9, MIDC, THANE BELAPUR ROAD, DIGHA, NAVI MUMBAI 400 708 PAN: AAACK 2238F VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-10(3), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MAHARSHI KARVE ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : MS. HEENA DOSHI, A.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI NEIL PHILIP, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 18.06.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.06.2015 O R D E R PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSES SEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.03.2012 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2007-08. 2. THE ASSESSEE, THROUGH ITS GROUNDS OF APPEAL, HAS AGITATED THE DISALLOWANCE OF PROVISION OF COMMISSION EXPENSES AM OUNTING TO RS.2,00,16,830/-. THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE DISAL LOWED THE PROVISION ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FURNISH NECE SSARY EXPLANATION IN RESPECT OF THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE ABOVE PROVISION AND DED UCTION OF TDS THEREUPON. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ST ATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ALL THE NECESSARY DETAILS BUT THE LOWER A UTHORITIES HAVE FAILED TO CONSIDER THE SAME. SHE HAS FURTHER INVITED OUR ATT ENTION TO THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 21.05.12 OF MR. SHEETAL GUDE, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WHO HAD CONDUCTED THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHEREIN HE HAS DEPOSED THAT HE HAD ATTENDED VARIOUS HEARINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND PRODUCED THE NECESSARY ITA NO.3668/M/2012 M/S. SULZER PUMPS INDIA LTD. 2 DETAILS AND EVIDENCES, EVEN AN APPLICATION UNDER RU LE 46A FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS ALSO SUBMITTED. HOWEVER, ALL THE DOCU MENTS, EVIDENCES ETC. WERE NOT TAKEN ON THE FILE BY THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THE ONE REASON OR THE OTHER AS EXPLAINED IN THE SAID AFFIDAVIT. HE HAS FURTHER DE POSED THAT NO PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSE SSEE WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE LD. A.R., BEFORE US, HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ENTIRE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES RELATING TO THE ABOVE PROVISION OF EXPENS ES WERE DULY FURNISHED, BUT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATIO N THE SAME WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. ADMITTEDLY, THE IMP UGNED ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED EX-PARTE OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE LD. CIT(A). CONSID ERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER GOING THROUGH THE AFFIDAVIT FILE D BY THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE, WE FEEL THAT THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DISPOSED OF BY THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PUT HIS CASE AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCES AND SUBMISSIO NS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE DOCUMENTS SOUGHT TO BE PRODUCED AND RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE ARE IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS WHICH GO TO THE ROOT OF THE CAS E. HENCE, UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CI T(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO GIVE PROP ER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE EVIDENCES AND DETAILS AND THEN CONSI DER THE SAME AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 4. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.06.201 5. SD/- SD/- (R.C. SHARMA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 20.10.2015. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. ITA NO.3668/M/2012 M/S. SULZER PUMPS INDIA LTD. 3 COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.