PARESH BHAVANJI VORA, MUMBAI V. DCIT - 30(2), MUMBAI

ITA 6105/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0017 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T A KHAN

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 6105/MUM/2016 PARESH BHAVANJI VORA VS. DCIT 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA , AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM ./ I .T.A. NO.6105/MUM/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010 - 11 ) PARESH BHAVANJI VORA FLAT NO. 503, 5 TH FLOOR, MAHARASHTRA APARTMENT, S.V. ROAD, OFF TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, MALAD (W), MUMBAI - 400 064 / VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX - 30(2), MUMBAI ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. AAAAPV3819J ( /APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T.A. KHAN , SR. D.R / DATE OF HEARING : 29/08 /2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30 /08/2017 / O R D E R PER RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER T HE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - 41, MUMBAI, DATED 11.07.2016 , WHICH IN ITA NO. 6105/MUM/2016 PARESH BHAVANJI VORA VS. DCIT 2 ITSELF ARISES FROM THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE A.O U/S 143(3 ) R.W.S 1 4 7 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT), DATED 09.03.2015 . 2. T H AT AS THE ASSESSEE IN HIS APPEAL FILED ON 13.10.2016 HAD FAILED TO FILE THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN FORM NO. 36 , IN TRIPLICATE, THEREFORE, A DEFECT MEMO WAS ISSUED ON 06.07.2017 , AND THE ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTED TO RECTIFY THE DEFECT WITHIN A PERIOD OF TEN DAYS. 3. THAT THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR 1 4.08.20 17 , ON WHICH DATE NEITHER THE ASSESSEE OR HIS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED , NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE US . TH AT IN ALL FAIRNESS THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 29.08.2017 AND A NOTICE INTI MATING THE FRESH DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. THAT THOUGH THE ASSESSEE WAS PUT TO NOTICE OF THE FRESH DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, HOWEVER, THIS TIME AGAIN THE ASSESSEE CHOSE NOT TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE. STILL FURTHER, I T WAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE DESPITE HAVING BEEN INTIMATED WAY BACK ABOUT THE DEFECT IN THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL, HOWEVER FAILED TO RECTIFY THE SAME TILL DATE. 5. W E THUS IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID STATE OF AFFAIRS ARE THUS PERSUADED TO OBSER VE THAT THE ASSESSEE WHO HAD FAILED TO RECTIFY THE DEFECT IN THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DESPITE LAPSE OF SUBSTANTIAL TIME PERIOD , CAN SAFELY BE HELD TO BE NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTI NG HIS APPEAL. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT AS THE ASSESSEE HAD FAIL ED TO RECTIFY THE DEFECT IN THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL , THEREFORE, THE SAME CAN SAFELY BE CHARACTERIZED AS AN INCOMPLETE AND INVALID APPEAL, ITA NO. 6105/MUM/2016 PARESH BHAVANJI VORA VS. DCIT 3 WHICH THUS CANNOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. WE THUS IN THE LIGHT OF THE AFORESAID FACTS DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 /08/2017. SD/ - SD/ - (RAJENDRA ) ( RAVISH SOOD ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; 30 .08.2017 PS. ROHIT KUMAR / 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 . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI