MAHARASHTRA HEAVY VEHICLE & INTERSTATE CONTAINERS OPERATORS ASSOCIATION, MUMBAI V. DDIT (E) (1)1, MUMBAI

ITA 5366/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 536619914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 18-07-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M MURALI
• Assessee Lawyers: PARAS S SARLA
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 11

Judgement Text

M/S MAH. HEAVY VEHICLE AND INTERSTATE CONTAINERS OPER ATORS ASSOCIATION I.T.A. NO. 5366/M/11 PAGE 1 O F 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH B MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 5365, 5366 & 5367/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06 MAHARASHTRA HEAVY VEHICLE & INTERSTATE CONTAINERS OPERATORS ASSOCIATION, B -1/112, 1 ST FLOOR, WADALA TRUCK TERMINAL, MUMBAI 400 037. PAN: AAATM 7945 A VS. D. D. I. T (EXEMPTION) 1(1), MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MR. PARAS S. SARLA. RESPONDENT BY : MR. M. MURALI. DATE OF HEARING: 04-06-2012. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 08-06-2012. O R D E R PER VIVEK VARMA, JM: THE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDERS OF CIT(A) 1, MUMBAI, DATED 25/02/2011, COVERING ASS ESSMENT YEARS 2003-04, 2004-05 AND 2005-06. AS SOME OF THE GROUND S ARE COMMON, WE, FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY, ARE PASSING A CONSOLID ATED ORDER IN ALL THE THREE CASES. M/S MAH. HEAVY VEHICLE AND INTERSTATE CONTAINERS OPER ATORS ASSOCIATION I.T.A. NO. 5366/M/11 PAGE 2 O F 3 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE AR OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WANTED TO FILE CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WHICH ARE NECESSARY FOR THE DISPOSAL OF THE APPEALS . 3. THE BENCH, ON GOING THROUGH GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ALL THE THREE YEARS AND FOUND THAT CERTAIN GROUNDS ARE COMMON, WH EREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS PLEADED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT CONSID ERED THE DOCUMENTS, ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE HIM. THE AR WANTED TO PLACE SUCH EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS FO R PROPER APPRECIATION OF ITS SUBMISSIONS. THE OTHER COMMON G ROUNDS IN ALL THE THREE YEARS WAS AGAINST THE DENIAL OF CLAIM OF EXEM PTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. THE AR, THEREFORE, PLEADED THAT ADDI TIONAL EVIDENCE WAS REQUIRED TO BE FILED IN ALL THE GROUNDS INCLUDING O THER GROUNDS WHICH ARE INDEPENDENT. HE FURTHER PLEADED THAT FILING OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WILL AUTOMATICALLY LEAD THE CASES TO BE RE STORED BACK TO EITHER OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. HE FURTHER PLEADED THAT EVEN IF THE CASES ARE RESTORED TO THE FILES OF THE CIT(A), EVEN CIT(A ) SHALL CALL FOR THE REMAND AND SEEK COMMENTS, WHICH SHALL INVOLVE FULL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE AO. HE THEREFORE PRAYED THAT IN ALL FAIR NESS, THE CASES NEED TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO, IN ALL THE TH REE YEARS CASES. 4. THE DR DID NOT OBJECT TO THE PRAYER OF THE ASSES SEE. 5. FROM THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED, WE FIND THAT T HE APPELLANT WANTED TO FILE CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WHICH WE RE NOT M/S MAH. HEAVY VEHICLE AND INTERSTATE CONTAINERS OPER ATORS ASSOCIATION I.T.A. NO. 5366/M/11 PAGE 3 O F 3 ALLOWED/CONSIDERED BY THE CIT(A), WHICH ACCORDING T O THE AR WERE NECESSARY, SO FAR AS THE ASSESSEE WAS CONCERNED. WE ALSO ACCEPT THE ARS SUGGESTION THAT ISSUE HAS ULTIMATELY TO BE DEC IDED BY THE AO. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) IN AL L THE THREE CASES AND DIRECT THE AO TO ALLOW THE ASSESSEE TO FILE ALL THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND SUBMISSIONS, AS IT WISHES TO FILE AND ADJUDICAT E ON THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING REASONABLE AND ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOLD ACCORDINGLY. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS FOR ALL THE THREE YEARS A RE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 08/06/2012. SD/- SD/- (R.S.SYAL) ( VIVEK VARMA ) ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER JUDIC IAL MEMBER MUMBAI: 08/06/2012. P/-*