AMRIT DYE CHEM INDUSTRIES, MUMBAI V. ACIT - 20(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6141/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0387 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N HEMALATHA
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6141/MUM/2016 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11) M/S. AMRIT DYE CHEM INDUSTRIES, A KUTIR RAM LAXMAN SOCIETY, AZAD LANE, ANDHERI (W), MUMBAI -400 058 PAN:AAAFA 2357A ...... APPELLANT VS. THE ACIT-20(1), PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI .... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : MS. N. HEMALATH A DATE OF HEARING : 10/08/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10/08/2017 ORDER THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE P ERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 IS DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORDER PASSED BY CIT(A)-36, MUMBAI DATED 26/04/2016, WHICH IN TURN, ARISES OUT OF OR DER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INC OME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 10/05/2013. 2 ITA NO.6141/MUM/2016 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11) 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS NOTED THAT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF NOTICE OF HEARING BEING I SSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD. THEREFORE, I PROCEED TO DISPOSE-OFF THE APPE AL EX-PARTE QUA THE APPELLANT ASSESSEE AFTER HEARING THE LD. DEPARTMEN TAL REPRESENTATIVE ON MERITS IN TERMS OF RULE -24 OF INCOME TAX (APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963. 3. THE DISPUTE IN THIS APPEAL ARISES FROM AN ADDIT ION OF RS.2,40,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF REMUNER ATION PAID TO PARTNERS. HOWEVER, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) REVEALS THAT THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED IN-LIMINE AS IT WAS FILED BELATEDLY AND C IT(A) DID NOT FIND SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY. ACCORDINGLY, THE CIT(A) DISMI SSED THE APPEAL. 4. BEFORE ME, THE RECORD REVEALS THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ALSO AFTER A DELAY OF APPROXIMATELY 58 DAYS. THE EXPLANATION FOR THE DELAY HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, WHICH, INTER-ALIA, S TATES THAT THE REASON FOR DELAY IS NOTHING BUT LITTLE CONFUSION WHETHER TO GO FOR LITIGATION OR NOT. 5. THE AFORESAID REASON ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE, I N MY CONSIDERED OPINION, IS NOT RELEVANT TO CONDONE THE DELAY, INAS MUCH AS, DELAY IN DECIDING TO GO FOR AN APPEAL IS NOT THE SAME THING AS A DELA Y IN FILING OF THE APPEAL. IN ANY CASE, THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIATION OF THE AFORESA ID REASON AND IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW THE APPEAL DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED AT THE THRESHOLD ITSELF AS UNADMITTED. I HOLD SO. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 3 ITA NO.6141/MUM/2016 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11) 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. THE ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COUR T IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARIN G ON 10/08/2017 SD/- (G.S. PANNU) ACCOCUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 10/08/2017 VM , SR. PS 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