RAJ CLEARING AGENCY, MUMBAI V. ADDL CIT RG 15(2), MUMBAI

ITA 569/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5812 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 25-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHAITANYA ANJARIYA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INC OME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHAYA , AM & SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM ./ I.T.A. NO . 569/MUM/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010 - 11 ) M/S RAJ CLEARING AGENCY, 303, JAYANT APARTMENT, D - WING, AIR CARGO COMPLEX, SAHAR, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI - 400099 / VS. ACIT RANGE - 15(2), MATRU MANDIR, GRANT ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 007. ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. A A IFR0443E ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SANJAY PARIKH, AR / RESPONDENTBY : SHRI CHAITANYA ANJARIYA, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 04 /12 /201 8 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05/12/2018 / O R D E R PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, J UDICIAL MEMBER : THE P RESENT APPE AL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) 36 , MUMBAI DATED 22.08.16 FOR AY 2010 - 11. 2 I.T.A. NO. 569 /MUM/201 7 M/S RAJ CLEARING AGENCY 2 . LD. AR APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION FOR SEEKING ADJOURNMENT, BUT AFTER GOING THROUGH THE SAME, WE FOUND THAT THERE IS NO REASONABLE CAUSE TO ADJOURN THE MATTER, THEREFORE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS REJECTED. 3 . FROM THE RECORDS, WE NOTICED THAT BEFORE LD. CIT(A) NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR THE DEPARTMENT HAD PUT THEIR APPEARANCE, THEREFORE LD. CIT(A) DECIDED THE CASE EX - PARTE. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LD. AR THAT ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. 4 . ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS PASSED BY REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INTENTIONALLY NOT APPEARED BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AND THE ORDERS PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) NEEDS NO INTERFERENCE. 5 . WE HAVE HEARD THE COUNSELS FOR BOTH THE PARTIES AND WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD AS WELL AS ORDERS PASSED BY REVENUE AUTHORITIES. FROM THE RECORDS, WE NOTICED THAT SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE, BUT EVEN INSPITE OF THAT, NONE APPEAR ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, CONSEQUENTLY, THE 3 I.T.A. NO. 569 /MUM/201 7 M/S RAJ CLEARING AGENCY APPEAL WAS DISMISSED EX - PARTE BY CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. 6. NOW BEFORE US, ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE SUBMISSIONS TO CHALLENGE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). AFTER HEARING T HE PARTIES AT LENGTH, ALTHOUGH WE ARE NOT CONVINCED WITH THE REASONING PUT FORTH BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON - APPEARANCE BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IT IS THE BOUNDED DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES O N EACH AND EVERY DATE OF HEARING AND TO ASSIST AND COOPERATE THE AUTHORITIES FOR THE EARLY DISPOSAL OF THE CASE/APPEAL. 7. BE THAT AS IT MAY, CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE SUBSTANTIAL CAUSE OF JUSTIC E , WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WOULD BE MET ONLY , WHEN WE PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE FOR CONTESTING THE APPEAL ON MERITS . IN OUR VIEW, IF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED TO REPRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE LD. CIT(A ) THEN IN THAT EVENTUALITY , NO PREJUDICE WOULD BE CAUSED TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE AS LEGITIMATE TAXES DUE ON THE ASSESSEES 4 I.T.A. NO. 569 /MUM/201 7 M/S RAJ CLEARING AGENCY CORRECT INCOME WILL BE ADJUDICATED . WHEREAS, IF THE CONTRARY VIEW IS TAKEN THEN IN THAT EVENTUALITY THE ASSESSEE MAY BE PUT TO GRE AT HARDSHIP AND DIFFICULTY. THEREFORE, KEEPING IN VIEW THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE SET ASIDE THE EX - PARTE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRE SENT HIS CASE AND THEREAFTER PASS AFRESH ORDER ON ALL THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WITHIN 60 DAYS FROM TODAY AND COOPERATE IN EARLY DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL 8. BEFORE PARTING, WE MAY MAKE IT CLEA R THAT OUR DECISION TO RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) SHALL IN NO WAY BE CONSTRUED AS HAVING ANY REFLECTION OR EXPRESSION ON THE MERITS OF THE DISPUTE, WHICH SHALL BE ADJUDICATED BY THE LD. CIT(A) INDEPENDENTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 9 . IN THE NET RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES WITH NO ORDER AS TO COST. 5 I.T.A. NO. 569 /MUM/201 7 M/S RAJ CLEARING AGENCY ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH DEC , 2018 SD/ - SD/ - ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 05 . 12 .201 8 SR.PS . DHANANJAY / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT - CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD F I LE / BY ORDER, . / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI