MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT RG 3(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4044/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9797 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARJU GARODIYA
• Keywords: Capital asset; Opportunity of being heard; Diversion of income; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 115JB; 148

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL J BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA , AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM ./ I.T.A. NO. 4044 /MUM/201 5 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 ) MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, CDO HUTMENT, OPP. LIC YOGKSHEMA, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI - 400 020 . / VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE - 3(2) , MUMBAI . ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. AAACM0712G ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) / ASSESSEE BY : SH. ANIL SATHE / REVENUE BY : MS. ARJU GARODIYA , D.R. / DATE OF HEARING : 19/06/2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 /08 /2017 / O R D E R PER RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - 8 , MUMBAI, DATED 27.03.2015 , FOR A.Y. 2008 - 09 , WHICH IN ITSELF ARISES FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT 1961 (FOR SHORT ACT), ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 2 DATED 29.01.2014 . THE ASSESSEE ASSAILING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) HAD RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE US: - 1. THE LEARNED CIT (A PPEALS ) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE INTEREST CREDITED TO THE GRANT - IN - AID ACCOUNT OF RS. 29,14,38,358/ - AS INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX AND FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE SAID INTEREST DID NOT ACCRUE OR BELONG TO THE APPELLANT . 2. IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT INCOME BEING INTEREST ON UNUTILIZED GRANTS WAS IN THE NATURE OF CONTINGENT INCOME . 3. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT GIVING AN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TO ESTABLISH THE NATURE OF THE GRANT AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL TREATMENT OF INTEREST RECEIVED ON UNUTILIZED GRANT . 4 . IN ALTERNATIVE AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE THE INTEREST INCOME BEING EARNED ON GOVERNMENT GRANTS DIRECTED FOR SPECIFIC ONGOING CAPITAL PROJECTS, THE RECEIPTS ARE DIRECTLY CONNECTED WITH OR INCIDENTAL TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF CAPITAL ASSETS . THEREFORE THE INTEREST EARNED ON SURPLUS FUNDS DEPOSITED IN BANKS SHOULD BE REDUCED FROM THE COST OF CAPITAL ASSETS CREATED OUT OF UTILIZATION OF CAPITAL GRANTS. 5 . IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE FACT THAT THE INTEREST OF RS. 29,14,38,358/ - IS NOT ACCR UING OR TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT CORPORATION, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) FAILED TO CONSIDER AND APPRECIATE THE CONTENTION THAT IF THE SAID INTEREST ON BANK FIXED DEPOSITS IS HELD TO BE TAXABLE, THE SAME OUGHT TO BE CHARGED UNDER THE HE AD INCOME FROM BUSINESS INSTEAD OF INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 6 . THE APPELLANT CRAVES, LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEND ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING . 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CORPORATION H AD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.03.2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 4,68,81,234/ - , WHICH WAS PROCESSED AS SUCH U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED U/S 147 AND A N OTICE U/S 148 ALONG WITH THE REASONS FO R INITATING THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 21.03.2013. THE ASSESSEE IN COMPLIANCE TO THE N OTICE RECEIVED U/S 148 OF THE ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 3 ACT , THEREIN E - FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y 2008 - 09 , DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 6,79,94,240/ - AND BOOK PROFIT U/S 115JB AT RS. 6,11,22,577/ - ON 31.03.2009. 3. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAD DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, VIZ A.Y. 2008 - 09 EARNED INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 29,14,38,358/ - ON FIXED D EPOSIT S MADE FROM THE GRANTS - IN - AID , HAD HOWEVER NOT OFFERED THE SAM E FOR TAX. THE A.O BEING OF THE VIEW THAT ONCE THE GRANT WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE, THE INTEREST FROM THE FDRS MADE OUT OF SUCH GRANTS WHICH SHOULD HA VE BEEN CREDITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS PROFIT & LOSS A/C AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES, WAS HOWEVER NOT FOUND TO HAVE BEEN DONE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE A.O FURTHER OBSERVED THAT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2005 - 06 THE SAID INTEREST INCOME WAS HELD AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES BY THE A.O , WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE MATTER WAS NOT CARRIED IN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. THAT DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE A.O CALLED UPON THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE INTERES T INCOME SHOULD NOT BE TAXED AS ITS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES . THE ASSESSEE IN ITS REPLY BEFORE THE A.O. SUBMITTED THAT THE GRANTS/SUBSID IES RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE S TATE GOVERNMENT AND C ENTRAL GOVERNMENT FOR UTILIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF TOURISM INDUSTRY IN INDIA WERE SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC DIRECTIONS , TO BE USED IN CERTAIN IDENTIFIED CAPITAL PROJECTS AND WERE TO BE INVESTED IN THE PRE - DEFINED PROJECTS ONLY AND NOT TO BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE UNUTILIZED PART OF THE GRANT FUNDS WERE PARKED IN THE BANKS IN THE FORM OF FIXED DEPOSITS, THEREFORE, ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 4 THE INTEREST EARNED O N SUCH FIXED DEPOSITS ALSO PARTOO K THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GRANTS , AND THEREFORE WAS CRED ITED TO THE GRANT - IN - AID ACCOUNT AND NOT OFFERED FOR TAX . THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE MINISTRY OF TOURISM THE INTEREST EARNED ON THE DEPOSITS MADE OUT OF THE GRANT FUNDS WERE TO BE UTILIZED ONLY FOR THE EXECUTION AND CO MPLETION OF THE CONCERNED PROJECT , WITHOUT DE VIATION TO ANY OTHER HEAD OF EXPENDITURE. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER IN ORDER TO FORTIFY HIS CLAIM THAT THE INTEREST INCOME ON THE GRANTS RECEIVED BY IT WERE NOT LIABLE TO BE SUBJECTED TO TAX, THEREIN SUBMITTED THAT T HE UNUTILIZED AMOUNT OF THE INTEREST EARNED ON SUCH GRANTS ALONG WITH THE PRINCIP AL AMOUNT OF THE GRANT WAS TO BE RETURNED TO THE MINISTRY OF TOURISM. THE ASSESSEE THUS ON THE BASIS OF THE AFORESAID FACTS THEREIN TRIED TO IMPRESS UPON THE A.O THAT AS THE I NTEREST EARNED ON THE GRANTS RECEIVED BY IT DID NOT BELONG TO THE CORPORATION, THEREFORE, THE SAME COULD NOT BE TAX ED IN I T S HANDS. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS IT ONLY ACTS AS AN INTERMEDIARY FOR COLLECTION OF THE INTEREST INCOME FOR AND ON BEHA LF OF THE GOVERNMENT, I.E. MINISTRY OF TOURISM TO WHOM THE INTEREST BELONGS TO AND HIS PAYABLE, THEREFORE, IT COULD SAFELY BE CONCLUDED THAT NO INTEREST DID ACCRUE TO THE ASSESSEE CORPORATION, AND THE SAME WAS TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF THE MINISTRY OF TOURIS M ON THE CONCEPT OF OVERRIDING TITLE. ALTERNATIVELY, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THOUGH THE INTEREST EARNED ON THE GRANTS PARKED IN THE FORM OF FIXED DEPOSITS WAS NOT TAXABLE IN ITS HANDS, HOWEVER, EVEN IF ANY ADDITION AS REGARDS THE SAME WAS TO BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE SAME COULD ONLY BE BROUGHT TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD I NCOME FROM BUSINESS AND NOT I NCOME FROM OTHER ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 5 SOURCES . 5. THE A.O AFTER DELIBERATI NG ON THE CONTENTION S OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREIN OBSERVED THAT THOUGH THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE ISSUE OF UTILIZATION OF INTEREST AMOUNT EARNED ON DEPOSITS MADE OUT OF RELEASED CENTRAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED THAT THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST EARNED ON FIXED DEPOSITS MADE OUT OF GRANTS WAS TO BE UTILIZED ONLY FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE CONCERNED PROJECT , WITHOUT DE VIATION TO ANY OTHER HEAD OF EXPENDITURE, HOWEVER, THE SAME WOULD NOT CHANGE THE NATURE OF INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND ITS TAXA TION THEREOF. IT WAS FURTHER OBSERVED BY THE A.O THAT AS THE TAXATION OF INCOME IS GOVERNED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, THEREFORE, THE SAME CANNOT BE OVERRULED BY A CIRCULAR RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE MINISTRY OF TOURISM . THAT AS PER THE A.O , ONCE THE GRANT WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE, THEN THE INTEREST FROM THE FDRS MADE OUT OF SUCH GRANTS HAD TO BE CREDITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS PROFIT & LOSS A/C AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE A.O FURTHER REFERRED TO THE FACT THAT UNLIKE AS IN A.Y 2005 - 06 WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAD CREDITED THE INTEREST INCOME ON TERM DEPOSITS TO ITS PROVISIONAL ACCOUNT, THE SAME WAS NOT SO DONE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE A.O THUS IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID FACTS AND TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE F ACT THAT SUCH INTEREST INCOME WAS HELD TO BE THE INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE A. O IN A.Y. 2005 - 06, WAS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE MATTER WAS NOT CARRIED IN APPEAL, THEREIN ADDED THE AMOUNT OF RS. 29,14,38,358/ - TO THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 6 6. THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEA L BEFORE THE CIT(A). THAT DURING THE COURSE OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL THE ASSESSEE THROUGH ITS COUNSEL FURNISHED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS DATED 20.06.2014, WHEREIN IT WAS AVERRED THAT AS THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE GRANTS AND THE INTEREST EARNED THEREOF HAVE TO BE CARRIED OUT AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE MINISTRY OF TOURISM IN EARMARKED DEPOSITS/SECURITIES, WHILE FOR THE UNUTILIZED AMOUNTS COMPRISING THE GRANT AND THE CORRESPONDI NG INTEREST HA D TO BE RETURNED TO THE GRANTOR, THEREFORE, THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED ON SUCH GRANTS COULD NOT BE HELD TO BE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS SUBMISSIONS TOOK SUPPORT OF CERTAIN JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS. ALTERNATIVELY, IT WAS SUBMI TTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THOUGH NO PART OF INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 29,14,38,358/ - HAD ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE , AND WAS THUS NO T TAXABLE IN ITS HANDS, HOWEVER , EVEN OTHERWISE THE SAME COULD ONLY BE BROUGHT TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM BUSINESS INSTEA D OF INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE ASSESSEE IN THE BACKDROP OF THE SUBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) THEREIN REQUESTED THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 29,14,38,358/ - (SUPRA) MADE BY THE A.O BE DELETED. 7. THAT THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON 12.03.2015 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE CIT(A) THAT AS THE DETAILS OF GRANTS, INTEREST, UTILIZATION AND NATURE OF THE SAME WHETHER CAPITAL OR REVENUE WHICH WERE TO BE PLACED ON RECORD INVOLVED VOLUMINOUS RECORD , THEREFORE , REQU ESTED THE CIT(A) THAT A FURTHER TIME PERIOD OF 10 - 12 DAYS MAY BE ALLOWED. THE CIT(A) AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE ADJ OURNED THE MATTER TO 25.03.2015. HOWEVER, AS ON 25.03.2015 THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT AN ADJOURNMENT AND REQUESTED THAT THE ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 7 MATT ER MAY BE FIXED FOR HEARING IN THE MONTH OF APRIL, 2015. THE CIT(A) HOWEVER DID NOT ALLOW THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND PROCEEDED WITH AND ADJUDICATE D THE MATTER ON THE BASIS OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF THE PROCE EDINGS . 8. THE CIT(A) AFTER DELIBERATING ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS PLACED ON HIS RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE , THEREIN CONCLUDED THAT ONCE THE GRANT HAD BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE, THE INTEREST ON THE FDRS MADE FROM THE AMOUNT OF SUCH GRANTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN CREDITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS PROFIT & LOSS A/C AND OFFERED TO TAX AS ITS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. T HE CIT(A) FURTHER FORTIFIED HIS AFORESAID VIEW BY REFERRING TO THE FACT THAT IN THE PAST SUCH INTEREST INCOME HAD BEEN ASSESSED BY THE A.O IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2005 - 06 AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES, WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND N O APPEAL WAS PREFERRED AGAINST THE SAME. THE CIT(A) FURTHER DISTINGUISHED ON FACTS THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS DATED 20.06.2014. THE CIT(A) FURTHER RELYING ON CERTAIN JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS , THEREIN CONCLUDED THAT THE DOCTRINE OF DIVERSION OF INCOME BY REASON OF AN OVERRIDING TITLE WAS NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, AS THE SAME WOULD ONLY BE APPLICABLE WHERE THE INCOME WAS DIVERTED AND NEVER REACHES THE PERSON IN WHOSE HANDS IT IS SOUGHT TO ASSESSED. THE CIT(A) THUS ON THE BASIS OF HIS AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE A.O , WHEREIN THE LATTER HAD ASSESSED THE INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 29,14,38,358/ - (SUPRA) AS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE CIT(A) THUS DISMISSED THE APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 8 9. THAT THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) HAD CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (FOR SHORT A.R) FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT THE DECLINING OF TH E CIT(A) TO GRANT AN ADJOURNMENT ON 25.03.2015 , HAD DIVESTED THE ASSESSEE OF AN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO ESTABLISH THE NATURE OF THE GRANT AND CONSEQUENTIAL TREATMENT OF INTEREST RECEIVED ON UNUTILIZED GRANT. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED A.R. THAT AS VOL UMINOUS DETAILS IN RESPECT OF GRANTS, INTEREST, UTILIZATION AND NATURE OF THE SAME WERE TO BE FURNISHED BEFORE THE CIT(A), THEREFORE, FOR THE SAID REASON AN ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT ON 12.03.2015, WHICH WAS ALLOWED AND THE MATTER STOOD ADJOURNED FOR 25.03.20 15. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R THAT DESPITE BEST EFFORTS THE REQUISITE DETAILS COULD NOT BE COMPILED, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE MADE A BONAFIDE REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE MATTER ON 25.03.2015 AND PRAYED THAT THE SAME BE FIXED IN THE MONTH OF APRIL, 2015. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R THAT THE CIT(A) HOWEVER DID NO T ACCEDE TO ITS REQUEST, AND PROCEEDED WITH THE MATTER ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL WHICH WAS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R THAT DUE TO THE AFORESAID REFUSAL OF THE CIT(A) TO ALLOW AN ADJOURNMENT TO THE ASSESSEE, THE LATTER HAD REMAINED DIVESTED OF AN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO PUT FORTH ITS CASE. IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID FACTS IT W AS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. PER CONTRA, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (FOR SHORT D.R.) RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 9 10. WE HAVE HEARD THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES FOR BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE ORDER S OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND FIND SUBSTANTIAL FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. A.R THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WAS NOT AFFORDED TO HIM BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. WE THOUGH ARE NOT OBLIVIOUS OF THE FACT THAT SEEKING OF AN ADJOURNMENT IS NOT AN INBORN RIGHT O F AN APPELLANT, AND THE SAME IS TO BE EXERCISED NOT IN A ROUTINE MANNER , BUT ONLY UNDER UNAVOIDABLE AND COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCES DUE TO WHICH THE APPELLANT /A.R IS UNABLE TO PUT FORTH AN APPEARANCE AND CONTEST THE APPEAL BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY. WE HOWEVER FIND THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT AS A MATTER OF ROUTINE, BUT IT WAS ONLY DUE TO HIS INABILITY TO COMPILE THE VOLUMINOUS RECORD IN RESPECT OF THE DETAILS OF GRANTS, INTEREST, UTILIZATION AND NATURE OF THE SAME WHICH WERE TO BE FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) FOR PROPER ASSISTANCE TO FACILITATE DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL , THAT A REQUEST FOR AN ADJOURNMENT WAS MOVED BEFORE THE CIT(A) . WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN COOPERATIVE DURING THE COURSE OF THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND FOR BONAFIDE REA SONS HAD SOUGHT AN ADJOURNMENT ON 25.03.2015. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF REFUSAL ON THE PART OF THE CIT(A) TO ALLOW AN ADJOURNMENT ON 25.03.2015 , HAD THUS REMAINED DIVESTED OF AN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT IN TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE , THE ASSESSEE WHO HAD REMAINED DIVESTED OF AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD ON ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 10 ACCOUNT OF REFUSAL OF A BONAFIDE ADJOURNMENT S OUGHT BY HIM, IN ALL FAIRNESS SHOULD BE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BY THE CIT(A). WE THUS IN THE BACKDROP OF OUR AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A), WHO IS DIRECTED TO REFIX THE MATTER AND DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL AFTER AFFORDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE MATTER IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN TERMS OF OUR AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS. THE GROUND OF APPEAL NO. 3 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US IS ALLOWED. 11. THAT AS WE HAVE RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, THEREFORE, WE REFRAIN FROM DEALING WITH THE REMAINING GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US, AND THE SAME ARE LEFT OPEN AND THE CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO DI SPOSE THEM AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 12. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 .08. 2017 SD/ - SD/ - ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) (RAVISH SOOD ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:23 08 . 2017 PS : ROHIT KUMAR ITA NO. 4044/MUM/2015 MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 11 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI