SURESH G PATEL, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

ITA 3950/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8103 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 03-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S PADMAJA

Judgement Text

, , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E, MUMBAI .., ! , ' , # BEFORE SHRI I.P.BANSAL, JM AND SHRI RAJENDRA, AM ITA NO.3950 /MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2005-06) ITA NO.3951 /MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2007-08) ITA NO.3952 /MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) ITA NO.3953 /MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2010-11) ITA NO.3954 /MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009-10) SURESH G. PATEL, 10, MITHILA SHOPPING CENTRE, V.M.ROAD, JUHU SCHEME, VILE PARLE (W), MUMBAI 400049 PAN: AAAJPP 5811H ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.22, ROOM NO.465, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MK ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020 ( $% / // / APPELLANT) ' ' ' ' / VS. ( ()$%/ RESPONDENT) $% * + * + * + * + /APPELLANT BY : NONE ()$% * + * + * + * + /RESPONDENT BY : MS. S. PADMAJA ' * ,-' / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 15.09.2014 ./0 * ,-' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.09.2014 1 1 1 1 / / / / O R D E R PER I.P.BANSAL (JM) : ALL THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL FEES PAID ALONG WITH APPEAL WAS SHORT AS FOLLOWS: S.NO. ITA NO. APPEAL FEE SHORT BY 1. 3950/MUM/13 RS.7258/- 2. 3951/MUM/13 RS.6941/- 3. 3952/MUM/13 RS.8121/- 4. 3953/MUM/13 RS.6161/- 5. 3954/MUM/13 RS.8127/- 2. ACCORDINGLY, DEFECT NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASS ESSEE. IN RESPONSE TO THE DEFECT NOTICE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED FIVE SEPARATE LETTERS FOR EACH OF THE APPEAL WHICH ARE DATED 3/9/2014. IN THE LETTER IT IS MENTIONED THAT IN OTHER CASES LD. CIT(A) HAS GRANTED RELIEF TO THE OTHER ASSESSEES, THEREFORE, T HE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE COST OF THE APPEAL FEES AN D ALSO THE COST OF COUNSEL FEES, ITA NO.3950-3954 /MUM/2013 2 THE RELIEF THAT WOULD BE EXPECTED TO BE ALLOWED W OULD BE LOWER THAN THE COST REFERRED AS ABOVE. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT WITHDRAWAL OF APPEALS AND IT IS MENTIONED THAT THE SAID WITHDRAWAL SHOULD NOT BE T REATED AS THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER BY THE ASSESSEE. ALL THESE LETTERS ARE PLACED ON RECORD. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THIS REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. THESE APPEALS ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF NON-REMOVAL OF DEFECT O F SHORTAGE IN PAYMENT OF APPEAL FEES. THEREFORE, WE DISMISS THESE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT MAKING GOOD THE DEFAULT OF SHORTAGE OF APPEAL FEES. IN VIEW OF DI SMISSAL OF THESE APPEALS ON ACCOUNT OF DEFECT, OTHER REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE MADE IN T HE APPLICATION CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AS THE APPEAL WOULD BE TREATED TO BE NON-EST BEING INCOMPETENT. 4. IN VIEW OF ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE APPEALS FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED ON THE DEFAULT OF NON-PAYMENT OF APPROPRIATE APPEAL FE ES. ACCORDINGLY, ALL THESE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THESE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED I N THE MANNER AFORESAID. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 15.09. 2 014. 1 * ./0 2'3 15.09.2014 / * : SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA) (I.P.BANSAL) ' ' ' ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; 2' DATED : 15.SEPT. 2014. VM. 1 * (,; < ;0, 1 * (,; < ;0, 1 * (,; < ;0, 1 * (,; < ;0,/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. $% / THE APPELLANT 2. ()$% / THE RESPONDENT. 3. =() / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. = / CIT(A)-13, MUMBAI 5. ;@: (,' , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. :A B / GUARD FILE. 1' 1' 1' 1' / BY ORDER, );, (, //TRUE COPY// C CC C/ // /D D D D (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, MUMBAI