NIYOSI TRADING & INVESTMENT P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 20(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4089/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1953 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2009
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S RANADR V ANAJANEYULU
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Non compliance

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, B BENCH, MUMBAI. BEFORE S/SHRI S.V.MEHROTRA, AM & VIJAY PAL RAO,JM I.T.A NO.4089/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 NIYOSI TRADING & INVESTMENT P.LTD. V. THE I.T.O. 2 0(3)(2), OXFORD CENTRE, 10, SHROFF LANE, COLABA, PIRAMAL CH AMBERS, PAREL, CAUSEWAY, MUMBAI-05. MUMBAI. PA NO.AAACN 2803 R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI SANJAY PARIKH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.S.RANA/DR. V.ANAJANEYULU O R D E R PER S.V.MEHROTRA, AM THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 16.6.2009 OF LD CIT (A)-VII, MUMBAI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 -07. 2. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CARRIED ON TRADING BUSINESS. IT HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT NIL. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.5,57,75,000/-, INTER ALIA, MAKING ADDI TION OF RS.1,80,75,000/- U/S.68 OF THE ACT. 3. BEFORE LD CIT (A), THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED AD DITIONAL EVIDENCE ON WHICH LD CIT (A) HAD CALLED FOR REMAND REPORT AND THEREAFTER CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. ITA NO.4089/M/09 M/S. NIYOSI TRADING AND INVESTMENT P.LTD . 2 4. LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE A O HAD REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO SUBMIT THE DETAILS BY 24.11.2008 AND BECAUSE OF THE SHORTAGE OF TIME; THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH THE DETAILS. HOWEVER, BEFORE LD CIT (A ), ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE FURNISHED BUT HE DID NOT ENTERTAIN THE SAME. THEREFORE, HE S UBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE DENOVO. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES. WE FIND THAT THOUGH THE REMAND REPORT WAS CALLED FOR FROM THE ASSESSING OFF ICER BY LD CIT (A) ON THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AS PER PARA 9.2 OF HIS ORDER BUT IN PARA 10, HE HAS OBSERVED THAT THERE IS NO REASON FOR ENTERTAINING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR NON COMPLIANCE TO SPECIFIC QUERIES MADE BY THE AO VIDE ORDER SHEET DATED 19.11.2008. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED ON 10. 12.2008 AND, THEREFORE, THE PERIOD AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE FOR PRODUCTION OF NECESSA RY DOCUMENTS WAS TOO SHORT. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IT W OULD BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THAT THE ORDER OF LD CIT (A) BE SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DENOVO CONSIDERATION ON THIS ISSUE. WE ORDER A CCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAN DS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED ON 30 TH APRIL, 2010 SD/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) SD/- (S.V. MEHROTRA) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) MUMBAI, DATED 30 TH APRIL, 2010 PARIDA COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-C-VII, MUM BAI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-IV-, MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH B, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ITA NO.4089/M/09 M/S. NIYOSI TRADING AND INVESTMENT P.LTD . 3 ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI DATE INITIALS 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 28.4.2010 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 28.4.2010 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER AM/JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER AM/J M 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER ITA NO.4089/M/09 M/S. NIYOSI TRADING AND INVESTMENT P.LTD . 4