KALPANA S.BHANDARI, THANE V. ITO WD 3(4), KALYAN

ITA 4246/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3258 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 06-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMIT KUMARDR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Fair market value
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

, - , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES SMC, MUMBAI , ! ' , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, ITA NO.4245/MUM/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 HIRABAI R. MADHVI, 103, TRIVENI DHARA, WAYALE NAGAR, KHADAKPADA, KALYAN (W), DIST. THANE-421301 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), 02 ND FLOOR, RANI MANSION, NEAR SBI,MURBAD ROAD, KALYAN-421301 / ASSESSEE / REVENUE P.A. NO . AJDPM6281D ITA NO.4246/MUM/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 KALPANA S. BHANDARI 103, TRIVENI DHARA, WAYALE NAGAR, KHADAKPADA, KALYAN (W), DIST. THANE-421301 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), 02 ND FLOOR, RANI MANSION, NEAR SBI,MURBAD ROAD, KALYAN-421301 / ASSESSEE / REVENUE P.A. NO. AJDPM6281D 2 ITA NO.4247/MUM/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 LATABAI A. KARADE 103, TRIVENI DHARA, WAYALE NAGAR, KHADAKPADA, KALYAN (W), DIST. THANE-421301 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), 02 ND FLOOR, RANI MANSION, NEAR SBI,MURBAD ROAD, KALYAN-421301 / ASSESSEE / REVENUE P.A. NO. ALKPK7886M ITA NO.4248/MUM/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 MANDA/JAYSHREE /ASHA R. NAIK 103, TRIVENI DHARA, WAYALE NAGAR, KHADAKPADA, KALYAN (W), DIST. THANE-421301 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), 02 ND FLOOR, RANI MANSION, NEAR SBI,MURBAD ROAD, KALYAN-421301 / ASSESSEE / REVENUE P.A. NO. ADCPN9663K ITA NO.4251/MUM/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 SUREKHA B. THAKUR 103, TRIVENI DHARA, WAYALE NAGAR, KHADAKPADA, KALYAN (W), DIST. THANE-421301 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), 02 ND FLOOR, RANI MANSION, NEAR SBI,MURBAD ROAD, KALYAN-421301 / ASSESSEE / REVENUE P.A. NO. ADIPT3511C $ % & / ASSESSEE BY NONE $ % & / REVENUE BY SHRI SUMIT KUMAR-DR / DATE OF HEARING 06/09/2016 & / DATE OF ORDER: 06/09/2016 3 & / O R D E R THIS BUNCH OF FIVE APPEALS IS BY THE DIFFERENT ASS ESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDERS ALL DATED 24/04/2015 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MUMBAI, CHALLENGING THE REOPENING U/S 147/148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTE R THE ACT), ON THE PLEA THAT NO VALID NOTICE U/S 148 OF T HE ACT WAS ISSUED WITHIN TIME LIMIT PROVIDED U/S 149 OF THE AC T. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CHALLENGED CONFIRMATION OF THE AD DITION MENTIONED IN THE RESPECTIVE APPEALS AND DIRECTING T HE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DETERMINED THE LONG TERM CAPIT AL GAIN ON THE SALE OF LAND AT VILLAGE GANDHARE, KALYAN BY CON SIDERING THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF LAND AS PER SECTION 55(2)( B) AS ON 01/04/1981. 2. DURING HEARING, NONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEES IN SPITE OF ISSUANCE OF REGISTERED AD NOT ICES ISSUED TO THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEE. THE REGISTERED AD NOTIC E SENT TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE ADDRESSES, PROVIDED BY ASSESSEE THEMSELVES, WERE RETURNED BACK BY THE POSTAL AUTHOR ITIES UNSERVED. THESE ASSESSEES DID NOT PROVIDE ANY NEW ADDRESS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEES NEITHER PRESENTED THEMSELVES NOR MOVED ADJOURNMENT PETITION. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSES SEES ARE NOT INTERESTED TO PURSUE THEIR APPEAL FILED BY THE THEM, THEREFORE, I HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO PROCEED EX-PARTE , QUA THE ASSESSEE, AND TEND TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD. DR, SHRI SUMI T KUMAR, DEFENDED THE ADDITION MADE IN THE RESPECTIVE APPEAL . 4 2.1. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I FIN D THAT THESE APPEALS WERE FILED BY THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEE ON 09/07/2015. THE REGISTERED AD NOTICES WERE SENT BY THE REGISTRY OF THE TRIBUNAL TO THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEE AT THE ADDRESSES PROVIDED BY THEM IN FORM NO.36. THESE NOT ICES WERE RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES. NEITHER NE W ADDRESSES WERE PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE NOR MOVED A NY ADJOURNMENT PETITION. IN SUCH A SITUATION, THESE A PPEALS CANNOT BE KEPT PENDING FOR INDEFINITE PERIOD, THERE FORE, I HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO DISMISS THESE APPEALS. HOWEVER, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IF ON A LATER DATE, THE RESPECTIVE APPELLANTS/ASSESSEE APPROACHES THIS TRIBUNAL AND SA TISFIES THE BENCH ADDUCING A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEA RANCE THEN THE BENCH MAY WITHDRAW THIS ORDER AND DECIDE O N MERIT. FOR THE TIME BEING, DUE TO THE AFOREMENTIONED REASO NS, THESE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. FINALLY, THESE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. DR AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 06/09/2016. SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) ! ' / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 06/09/2016 F{X~{T? P.S / ! & $ )!*+ ,&+-* / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '#$%& / THE APPELLANT 5 2. '(%& / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ) ) * / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. ) ) * / CIT- , MUMBAI 5. + ,- ' , ) '#$ ' / , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. -0 1$ / GUARD FILE. & / BY ORDER, (+# ' //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI