ARTISAN, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT CIR 18(2), MUMBAI

ITA 5688/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2412 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-05-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 10-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A RAMACHANDRAN
• Assessee Lawyers: DR K SHIVRAM

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI BEORE SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTNT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 5688/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) M/S. ARTISAN, C/O.R.A.SINGH & ASSOCIATES, 25, SAIBABA SHOPPING CENTRE, KESHAV RAO KADAM MARG, MUMBAI CENTRAL, MUMBAI 400008 PAN: AAAFA 2327E .... APPELLANT VS. THE ACIT, CIR.18(2), 1 ST FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, PAREL, MUMBAI 400 012. .... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : DR. K.SHIVRAM RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.RAMACHANDRAN DATE OF HEARING : 24/11/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24/11/2015 ORDER PER N.K.BILLAIYA,AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-29, MUMBAI DATED 16/08/2011 PERTAINING TO TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED TWO SUBSTANT IVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SUBSEQUENTLY REVISED ITS GROUNDS OF APPEAL, INTER-ALIA, CLAIMED THAT THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) 2 ITA NO. 5688/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) IS BAD IN LAW AS THE CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT THE CASE BEFORE HIM. 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE STATED THAT WHEN THE CASE WAS FIRST FIXED FOR HEARING, ON 1/10/ 2010 THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE A LETTER DATED 30/09/2010 FILED A WRITTEN SUBMISSION. THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 21/04/2011, ON WHICH DATE THE CASE WAS AGAIN ADJOURNED. IT IS THE CASE OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD CLOSED DOWN ITS BUSINESS, THEREFORE, T HE CIT(A) WAS INTIMATED WITH THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS. LD. COUNSEL CONCLUDED BY SAYING THAT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE CHANGED ADDRESS THE CI T(A) PASSED AN EX- PARTE ORDER. LD. COUNSEL PRAYED FOR THE RESTORATIO N OF THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). THE LD. DR FAIRLY CONCEDED TO T HIS. 3. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE CONTENTS OF T HE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. WE FIND THAT IT IS AN E X-PARTE ORDER. THOUGH THE ASSESSEES REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT APPEAR AND FI LED A WRITTEN SUBMISSION, BUT THEREAFTER THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT A TTEND THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THOUGH THE CHANGE IN ADDRESS WAS INTI MATED TO THE CIT(A) BUT THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED. IN THE INTER EST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR-PLAY, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION THE ASSESSEE M UST GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND ITS CASE. WE ACCORDINGLY RE STORE THIS APPEAL TO THE FILES OF THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL AFRESH AFTER GIVING REASONABLE AND FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF BEI NG HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AGREED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE 3 ITA NO. 5688/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) LD. CIT(A) ON 24/02/2016 WITHOUT NOTICE. WE, THERE FORE, DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO ATTEND THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS ON 24/ 02/2016. 4. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED A S ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 24 TH NOVEMBER 2015. SD/- SD/- ( PAWAN SINGH) (N.K.BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 24/11/2015 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 VM , SR. PS