GITANJALI EXPORTS CORPORATION, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 1(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4925/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8955 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: K
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 29-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAVAN KUMAR BEER LA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES K, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4925/MUM/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 M/S. GITANJALI EXPORTS CORPORATION LTD., A-1, 7 TH FLOOR, LAXMI TOWERS, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (EAST), MUMBAI [PAN : AABCG 2804 N] VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PAVAN KUMAR BEERLA, DR DATE OF HEARING : 29-11-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21-12-2018 O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRANSFER PRICI NG OFFICER- 1(3), MUMBAI, U/S. 92CA(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT (ACT) , DATED 30-11-2012 FOR THE AY. 2009-10. ITA NO. 4925/MUM/2016 2 2. INITIALLY, THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 02 -07-2018 AND SINCE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE, THE C ASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 26-11-2018, FOR WHICH NOTICE WAS ISSUED THROUGH RPAD. AGAIN ON 26-11-2018, SINCE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 29-11-2018 WHICH WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. AGAIN ON 29-11-2018, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE NOR WAS ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT RECEIVED. THEREFORE , WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS AP PEAL AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS BEING DISPOSED OFF ON M ERITS AFTER THE HEARING THE LD.DR. 3. AFTER HEARING THE LD.DR AND PERUSING THE MATERIALS ON RECORDS WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORD ER IN LIMINE WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE AS THE A SSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR IN APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. IN OUR OPIN ION THE LD CIT(A) IS AN APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND SHOULD HAVE PASS ED THE ORDER AFTER CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF THE CASE. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE INCLINED TO RESTORE THE APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME ON MERITS A FTER AFFORDING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 4925/MUM/2016 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018 SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /MUMBAI; /DATED : 21 ST DECEMBER, 2018 TNMM / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. !' / THE APPELLANT 2. #!' / THE RESPONDENT 3. $ % ( ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI 4. $ % / CIT(A), MUMBAI 5. ()* +, , $ .+,$/ , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. *012 / GUARD FILE $ / BY ORDER, # //TRUE COPY// / $ (DY./ASST. REGISTRAR) $ .+,$/, / ITAT, MUMBAI