ACIT 24(1), MUMBAI V. LATE DAYARAM DHARMASHI MADAN, MUMBAI

ITA 6016/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 100948 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 02-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LOVE KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY R PARIKH
• Section: 6

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH D , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN , VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO S . 6016 & 6017/MUM/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 200 6 - 07 & 2007 - 08 ACIT - 24(1) C - 13, R. NO. 503, PRATYA KSH KAR BHAVAN BANDRA (E), MUMBAI - 51 VS. LATE DAYARAM D. MADAN PROP. JAI BHAVANI GLASS TRADERS. 8, VEENA DALVI INDL. ESTATE. S.V. ROAD, JOGESHWARI (W) MUMBAI 400 102 PAN: - AGZ PM 7952 N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SANJAY R. PARIKH REVENUE BY : SHRI LOVE KUMAR DATE OF HEARING : 01.06.2015 DATE OF ORDER : 31 . 0 8 .201 5 O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA , A M: THIS IS SET OF TWO APPEALS, I.E., FOR TWO CONSECUTIVE YEARS, BEING AS SESSMENT YEARS ( A.YS. ) 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08 OF EVEN DATE 17.07.2012 BY COMMISS IONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) - 34 MUMBAI ( CIT(A) FOR SHORT), ALLOWING THE ASSESSEES APPEAL DELETING THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT HEREINA FTER ) FOR THE RELEVANT YEARS. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE BY THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) , THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL , THAT THE PENALTY COULD NOT SURVIVE AS THE ASSESSEE HAD SINCE SUCCEEDED IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE TR IBUNAL, TO WHOM THE MATTER TRAVELED AT THE INSTAN CE OF THE REVENUE, PLACING ON RECORD A COPY OF THE SAID ORDER DATED 17.10.2014, AGAIN COMBINED , FOR THE RELEVANT YEARS ITA NOS. 6016 & 6017/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 06 - 07 & 07 - 0 8 ) ACIT VS. LATE DAYARAM D. MADAN 2 (ITA NOS. 5576 & 5577/MUM/2012) . THE L D. DR , ON BEING CONFRONTED WITH THE SAME , COULD N OT RAISE ANY VALID OBJECTION TO THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES, AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, INCLUDING THE TRIBUNALS ORDER SUPRA. THE TRIBUNAL HAS ANNULLED ASSESSMENT AS THE SAME WAS FRAMED ON A PERSON WHO WAS NO LONGER AL IVE , I.E. A DEAD PERSON , WITH THE NOTICE S U/S 143(2 ) BEING ALSO ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE DECEASED ASSESSEE AND , FURTHER , WHICH COULD NOT BE PROVED TO HAVE BEEN VALIDLY SERVED. RELIANCE W AS PLACE D BY IT ON A NUMBER O F DECISIONS. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE SET ASIDE THE LEVY OF THE IMPUGNED PENALTY. WE MAY THOUGH ADD THAT IF AT ANY STAGE THE ASSESSMENT /S IS REVIVED, THE REVENUE SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO SEEK THE RESTORATION OF THE PRESENT APPEAL / S FOR BEING DECIDE ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE. WE DECIDED ACCORDINGLY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE BOTH APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUES APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN CO URT ON 31.08 . 2015 . S D/ - SD/ - D. M ANMOHAN SANJAY ARORA (VICE PRESIDENT) ( A CCOUNTANT MEMBER) MUMBAI, DATED: 31.08 . 2015 . * S RIVASTAVA COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUM BAI THE DR D BENCH BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.