PRATUL JOSHI, MUMBAI V. ITO (iT)3(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4321/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1233 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-06-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BEENA SANTOSH
• Assessee Lawyers: HEMANG DESAI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4321/M/2016 (AY 2011 - 2012) PRATUL J OSHI, C/O. HIMANK DESAI & CO., OFF NO.2 GOKUL KUNJOPP BANK OF INDIA, DANPADA, KHAR (W), MUMBAI 400 052. / VS. ITO (IT) - 3(1), MUMBAI. ./ PAN : AAJPJ7049R ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI HEMANG DESAI / RESPONDENT BY : MS. BEENA SANTOSH, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 23.03.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 .04.2017 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 22.6.2016 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 57, MUMBAI DATED 28.3.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 2012. IN THIS APPEAL, ASSESSEE RAISED SIX GROUNDS IN TOTO. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THIS IS THE CASE WHERE THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED IN AN EX - PARTE MANNER I GNORING THE FACTS OF THE CASE. ASSESSEE, BEING AN NRI, IS ON BOARD OF SHIP FOR THE MAJOR PART OF THE YEAR AS CHIEF ENGINEER OF A MERCHANT NAVAL VESSEL. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 21,85,450/ - AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 12,060/ - . THERE WAS DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A). ASSESSEE SOUGHT CONDONATION OF THE SAID DELAY GIVING THE REASONS THAT REVOLVES AROUND HIS NON - AVAILABILITY IN INDIA AS HE TRAVELS IN THE SHIPS. IGNORING THE SAME, CIT (A) NOT ONLY REJEC TED THE CONDONATION REQUEST BUT ALSO CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2 3. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE FACTS, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT MY ATTENTION TO THE PAPER BOOK AND MENTIONED THAT SOME OF THE PAPERS WERE NOT APPRECIATED PROPERLY BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES BOTH RELATING TO THE CONDONATION ISSUE AS WELL AS ON THE MERITS. IN THIS REGARD, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUES MAY BE REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AFTE R CONDONING THE DELAY. 4. ON HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS PLACED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND ALSO THE AFFIDAVIT, DATED 17.3.2017, FILED BY THE ASSESSEE , I FIND THAT THE ASS ESSEE GAIN S NOTHING BY FILING THE APPEAL BELATEDLY BEFORE THE CIT (A). THEREFORE, T HE REASON GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IE NON - AVAILABILITY IN INDIA IS NOT WITHOUT MERIT. CONSIDERIN G THE SAME, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT IT SHOULD BE FIT CASE FOR CONDONATION OF THE DELAY AND THE ADDITIONAL EV IDENCES SHOULD BE ADMITTED. F INALLY , THE MATTER IS REQUIRED TO BE REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAID DOCUMENTS . ACCORDINGLY I ORDER. ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO GIVE A RE ASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH. ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO ATTEND TO THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT FAIL. ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCE D IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH APRIL, 2017. SD/ - (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 12 .04.2017 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 3 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI