G.S. ENTERTAINMENT, MUMBAI V. ACIT CEN CIR 24 & 26, MUMBAI

ITA 4499/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7303 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-1969
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM) I.T.A. No. 4499/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year 2009-10) M/s. G.S. Entertainment B-001/01 Bhagtani Krishng Dattaatrey Road Santacruz West Mumbai-400 049. Vs. ACIT, CC-24&26 Room No. 465 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road Mumbai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 4362/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ACIT, CC-24&26 Room No. 465 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road Mumbai-400 020. Vs. M/s. G.S. Entertainment B-001/01 Bhagtani Krishng Dattaatrey Road Santacruz West Mumbai-400 049. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No.AACFG0200A Assessee by None Department by Shri S. Senthil Kumaran Date of Hearing 29.3.2016 Date of Pronouncement 1.4.2016 O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran, AM :- These cross appeals are directed against the order dated 30.03.2013 passed by Learned CIT(A)-39, Mumbai and they relate to the assessment year 2009-10. 2. The appeal of the assessee was last heard on 18.02.2016 and on that date, the Bench passed an order imposing a cost of Rs.5,000/- upon the assessee, since the case was adjourned at the specific request of the assessee’s M/s. G.S. Entertainment 2 counsel. The Bench also directed the assessee to remit the cost of Rs.5,000/- in Prime Minister’s relief fund and to submit the proof of payment before the next date of hearing, i.e., by 29-03-2016. Today a person claiming to be the assistant of the assessee’s counsel appeared and sought adjournment. He was also not aware of the details relating to payment of cost. The very fact that a person has been deputed to seek adjournment shows that the assessee was well aware of the order passed by the bench on 18-02-2016. However, the assessee has failed to comply with the order passed by the Tribunal and has also failed to give any valid reason for non-compliance. Hence, on this reason alone, the appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed. 3. However, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex-parte, without the presence of the assessee. The only issue urged by the assessee relates to the addition of Rs.1.04 crores made u/s 41(1) of the Act. We notice that the addition made by the assessing officer has been confirmed by Ld CIT(A) on proper reasoning. Hence we confirm his order on this issue. 4. We shall now take up the appeal filed by the revenue. The issue agitated therein relates to the deletion of assessment of Rs.2.37 crores relating to advances received by the assessee. The revenue, apart from contesting the decision of Ld CIT(A) on merits, has also alleged that the Ld CIT(A) has violated the provisions of Rule 46A of the I.T Rules by admitting additional evidences without providing opportunity to the assessing officer. Since there is violation of the provisions of Rule 46A, we are of the view that the assessing officer should be confronted with the additional evidences furnished by the assessee before Ld CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) on this issue and restore the matter to the file of the assessing officer for fresh examination of the same. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed and the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. M/s. G.S. Entertainment 3 Order has been pronounced in the Open Court on 1.4.2016. Sd/- Sd/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated : 1/4/2016 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard File. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai PS