BRITISH PHARMACEUTICAL LABORATORIES, MUMBAI V. ACIT CIR 14(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4650/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3781 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 11-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDRA VIJAY
• Assessee Lawyers: BALDEV IDNANI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 131

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV , JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ./ I.T.A. NO. 4650 , 4651 AND 4652 /MUM/ 201 2 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1999 - 2000 , 1994 - 95 AND 1996 - 97 ) M/S BRITISH PHARMACEUTICAL LABORATORIES, C/O M/S IDNANI AND IDNANI, ADVOCATES 53A, MITTAL TOWER, 210, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI - 400021 / VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 14(1 ), 2 ND FLOOR, EARNEST HOUSE, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI - 400021 . ./ PAN : AAAFB6468K / ASSESSEE BY S HRI BALDEV IDNANI / REVENUE BY SHRI CHANDRA VIJAY / DATE OF HEARING : 10.8 . 201 6 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.8. 2016 / O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, A. M: THE SE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE TWO SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD.CIT(A) - 25 , MUMBAI DATED 13.3.2012 AND 14 .3.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 1999 - 2000, 1994 - 95 AND 1996 - 97 . SINCE THESE APPEALS PERTAIN TO THE SAME ASSESSEE, THESE APPEALS ARE BEING DECIDED BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THE COMMON ISSUE RAISED IN ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IS AGAINST THE DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE LD.CIT(A) BY PASSING EX - PARTE ORDER THEREBY NOT CONSIDERING THE FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 2 4650 - 4651 - 4652/ MUM/201 2 AND ALSO NOT CONSIDERING VARIOUS GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL MEMO AND THE FACTS OF THE ASSESS EES CASE FILED THEREIN . 3 . FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.12.1999 DECLARING TOTAL LOSS OF RS.2,19,68,182/ - COMPRISING OF RS.33,11,226/ - CURRENT YEAR LOSS PLUS BROUGHT FORWARD LOSS OF RS.1,86,57,956/ - , WHICH W AS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER, SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND STATUTORY NOTICES UNDER SECTION 143(2) AND 142(1) WERE ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE CALLING UPON THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH DETAILS IN ANNEX URE ON OR BEFORE 7.1.2002 BUT THERE IS NO RESPONSE AND NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER, SUMMONS UNDER SECTION 131 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE FIRM ON 8.2.2002 REQUIRING THE ATTENDANCE OF THE MANAGING PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM FOR FURNISHING SPECIFIC DETAILS AS MENTIONED THEREIN BUT AGAIN SUMMONS WERE NOT COMPLIED WITH. ULTIMATELY , ON 15.2.2002, TWO PERSONS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM ALONG WITH SHRI B N SHAH, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE AO AND REQUESTED FOR FURTHER TIME TO THE DETAILS WHICH WAS DENIED AND REJECTED BY T HE AO I N VIEW OF THE FACTS THAT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE TO BE COMPLETED ON 31.3.2002 AND WHEN THE SAID PERSONS ALONGWITH THEIR AR CAME TO KNOW ABOUT THE SAID FAC T THEY DECLINED TO PUT THEIR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER SHEET AND THEREFORE THE AO PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE 3 4650 - 4651 - 4652/ MUM/201 2 ASSESSMENT EX - PARTE ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT VIDE ORDER DATED 27.3.2002 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF T HE ACT ASSESSING THE INCOME AT RS.19,75,603/ - BY MAKING VARIOUS DISALLOWANCES AS DETAILED IN PAGE 3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE AO, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO DISMISSED THE APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX - PARTE FOR NON ATTENDING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE HIM DESPITE VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES ALLOWED BY THE LD.CIT(A) TO THE ASSESSEE. NOW, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4 . WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES, PER USED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US INCLUDING THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW . WE FIND FROM THE RECORD THAT BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE PASSED THE ORDERS EX - PARTE WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THESE AUTHORITIES DE SPITE VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES GRANTED BY THE SAID AUTHORITIES. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE MATER BE HEARD ON MERIT AND BE DECIDED ACCORDINGLY. HOWEVER, WE DO NOT AGREE WITH THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.AR ON THIS ISSUE AS THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT TOU CHED AND DECIDED THE VARIOUS GROUNDS RAISED BEFORE IT DUE TO NON - COOPERATIVE ATTITUDE OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER, IF THE ASSESSEE IS GIVEN ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY NO PREJUDICE WOULD BE CAUSED TO THE REVENUE AND A LSO IT WOULD MEET ENDS OF JUSTICE. 4 4650 - 4651 - 4652/ MUM/201 2 ACCORDINGLY, WE RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION OF THE MATTER WITH FAIR AND REASON ABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5 . WITH REGARD TO THE REMAINING APPEALS PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1994 - 95 AND 1996 - 97 , W E HAVE ALREADY DECIDED AN IDENTICAL ISSUE IN THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999 - 2000, THEREFORE, OUR DECISION IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999 - 2000 , MUTATIS MUTANDIS , WOULD APPLY TO THESE APPEALS AS WELL. THE AO IS DIRECTED ACCORDINGLY. 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 . 0 8 . 2016. S D SD ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV ) (RAJESH KUMAR) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 10 . 8 .2016 SR.PS:SRL: / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWAR DED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD F ILE / BY ORDER, T RUE COPY / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI