SHARAD SHANTILAL DOSHI, MUMBAI V. ITO 23(3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 6744/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 92234 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 21-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: JAYAT R BHATT
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E, MUMBAI , . . , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6744/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10 SHARAD SHANTILAL DOSHI, 7, ANJALI CHS LTD. J.N.ROAD, MULUND(WEST), MUMBAI-400080 / VS. ITO-23(3)(3), MUMBAI ( !'# $ /ASSESSEE) ( % / REVENUE) P.A. NO AADPD3783C !'# $ / ASSESSEE BY SHRI JAYAT R. BHATT % / REVENUE BY SHRI N.V. NADKARNI-DR & % ' $ ( / DATE OF HEARING 16/04/2015 ' $ ( / DATE OF ORDER: 16/04/2015 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DA TED 27/09/2013 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI, BROADLY ON THE GROUND THAT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE W AS NOT SHARAD SHANTILAL DOSHI, 2 DECIDED ON MERIT ALONG WITH OTHER GROUNDS CONFIRMIN G THE ADDITION MADE ON VARIOUS COUNTS. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, SHRI JAYANT R. BHATT, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ADVANCED HIS A RGUMENTS, WHICH ARE IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND RAISED BY FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WA S NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE L D. DR. MS. N.V. NADKARNI, DEFENDED THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT I N THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WITHOUT G OING INTO MUCH DELIBERATION, WE NOTE THAT THE APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING FOR 29/07/2013 ON WHICH NOBOD Y ATTENDED THE HEARING. THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT AND THUS THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR 23/08 /2013. THE ASSESSEE AGAIN REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT, THUS, THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 10/09/2013. SINCE, NON-AP PEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE ORDER WAS PASSED AN EX-PARTY. THE LD. COUNSEL CONTENDED THAT DUE TO SOME CERTAIN UNAVOIDA BLE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR, HOWEV ER, FURTHER ADDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING A PRIMA F ACIE GOOD CASE. KEEPING IN VIEW, THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JU STICE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET-ASIDE AND THIS FILE SENT TO T HE FILE OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR FR ESH ADJUDICATION ON MERIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WITH FURTHER LI BERTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCE, IF ANY, IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM. SINCE, THE SHARAD SHANTILAL DOSHI, 3 ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON THE APPOINTED DATE, THEREFO RE, THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO REMAIN VIGILANT AND TO APPE AR BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS FRO1M THE RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER AND THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS FREE TO DEC IDE THE APPEAL ON A MUTUALLY AGREED DATE. IF THE ASSESSEE S TILL DOES NOT APPEAR WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD OF FIFTEEN DAYS, THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS FREE TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN TH E PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF BOTH SIDES, AT TH E CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 16/04/2015. SD/- SD/- ( B.R.BASKARAN ) (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER & MUMBAI; ) DATED : 16/04/2015 F{X~{T? P.S/. . . %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *+,- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./,- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. & 0$ ( *+ ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. P4. & 0$ / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 2%3 .$! , *+( *! 4 , & / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 5' 6 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, /2+$ .$ //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , & / ITAT, MUMBAI