SAILEE DEVELOPERS P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ACIT 9(3), MUMBAI

ITA 531/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 100895 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 01-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MAHAPATRA

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM L AL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER / I .T.A. NO. 531/MUM/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 - 08 M/S. SAILEE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., A/004,PRATHMESH HORIZON, LINK ROAD, NEW MHB COLONY, BORIWALI (W), MUMBAI - 400 092 / VS. THE ACIT - 9(3), MUMBAI ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAHCS 0854Q ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: NONE / RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.K. MAHAPATRA / DATE OF HEARING : 01 .0 9 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01 .0 9 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 20 , MUMBAI DT. 29 . 6 .201 1 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 0 8 . 2. THE SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. ITA. NO. 531/M/2012 2 3. THE APPEAL IS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 138 DAYS. A PERUSAL OF OUR RECORD SHOW THAT THE APPEAL WAS FIRST POSTED FOR HEARING ON 23 .1.2013 AND AT THE REQUEST OF ASSESSEES CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED. ONCE AGAIN WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING ON 15.1.2014 AT THE REQUEST OF ASSESSEES COUNSEL, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED. ON 8.7.2014, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. NOTICE WAS SERVED THROUGH RPAD. ON 9.3.2015 AGAIN NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE NOTICE WAS SERV ED THROUGH RPAD. EVEN TODAY, NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF THE SERVICE OF THE NOTICE AND THE DATE OF HEARING AS MENTIONED HEREINABOVE. 4. AS MENTIONED ELSEWHERE, THE APPEAL IS BARRED BY LIMITATION. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT STATING THAT THE APPEAL PAPERS WERE DELIVERED TO CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT AND BECAUSE OF THE NEGLIGENCE OF THE CHART ERED ACCOUNTANT THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE FILED ON TIME. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO SUPPORTING DECLARATION FROM THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM THAT THE DELAY WAS CAUSED ON THE NEGLIGENCE OF THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. CONSIDERING ALL THESE FACTS IN TOTALITY, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST SEPTEMBER, 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( RAM L AL NEGI ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 1 ST SEPTEMBER , 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS ITA. NO. 531/M/2012 3 / 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