NITIN M FURIA, MUMBAI V. ACIT CC 15& 16, MUMBAI

ITA 6766/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1486 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 12-03-2010
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 24-11-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAGDISH
• Assessee Lawyers: NITIN M FURIA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH B, MUMBAI. BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.NO. I.T.A. NO. ASSTT. YEAR. 1. 6766/MUM/2008 2000-01 2. 6767/MUM/2008 2001-02 3. 6768/MUM/2008 2004-05 4. 6769/MUM/2008 2005-06 5. 6770//MUM/2008 2006-0 7. SHRI NITIN M. FURIA, ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF 1, TARALIKA, 216, SIR VS. INCOME TAX, BHALCHANDRA ROAD, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15 & 16, MATUNGA, MUMBAI. MUMBAI : 400019. PAN AAAPF0305P APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI NITIN M. FURIA RESPONDENT BY : SHR I JAGDISH. O R D E R PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. ALL THESE APPEALS ARE FILED AGAINST SEPARATE BUT ID ENTICAL ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS), CENTRAL-IV, MUMB AI DATED 26-09- 2009 WHEREIN HE HAD CONFIRMED THE ORDERS OF PENALTY PASSED U/S 271(1)(C)OF THE INCOME TAX ACT BY THE AO ON 30-06-2 008. AS THE ISSUES ARISING OUT OF ALL THESE APPEALS ARE COMMON AND AS THEY BELONG TO THE SAME ASSESSEE, THEY ARE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF THIS COMMON ORDER. 2 2. SHRI NITIN M. FURIA, THE ASSESSEE, APPEARED IN PERSON AND FILED A BULKY PAPER BOOK. MR. NITIN M. FURIA SUBMIT TED THAT HE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE, FROM APPEARING EITHE R BEFORE THE AO OR BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND THAT THIS NON APPEARANCE HAS LED TO THE AUTHORITIES PASSING ORDERS WITHOUT CONSIDERING HIS SUBMISSIONS. HE SUBMITTED PHOTO COPIES OF MEDICAL PAPERS EVIDENCING THE FACT THAT HE WAS UNDERGOING TREATMENT FOR VARIOUS AILMENTS. HE ALSO PRODUCED RECORDS TO SHOW THAT HE WAS UNDER A CARE OF CARDIOLOGIST AND W AS ADVISED COMPLETE BED REST. MRS. ARUNA FURIA WAS ALSO UNDER TREATMENT FOR FLUCTUATION IN PULSE, BP AND ABDOMINAL COMPLAINTS AND THAT SHE HAD UNDERGONE SURGERY. MR. NITIN FURIA HAS ALSO PRODUCED COPIES OF HIS PAS SPORT TO DEMONSTRATE THE FACT THAT CONSEQUENT TO HIS RECOVERY, HE HAD TO TRAVEL ABROAD AND THUS WAS NOT AVAILABLE IN INDIA TO ATTEND BEFORE THE LOW ER AUTHORITIES. 3. MR. NITIN M. FURIA PLEADED THAT KEEPING IN VIEW THIS MEDICAL CONDITION, AND AS GREAT INJUSTICE WOULD BE DONE TO HIM, IF ORDERS ARE NOT PASSED AFTER HEARING HIM AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERAT ION THE MATERIAL THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE, HE PRAYED THAT THE ISSUE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 4. MR. JAGDISH, LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, THO UGH NOT LEAVING HIS GROUND, ULTIMATELY SUBMITTED THAT THE B ENCH MAY CONSIDER THE GENERAL BEHAVIOUR OF MR. NITIN M. FURIA AND DECIDE THE ISSUE ACCORDINGLY. 5. ON A CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ON A PERUSAL OF THE PAPERS ON RECORD A ND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE HOLD AS FOLLOWS. 6. THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO REPRESENT HIS CASE EITHER BEFORE THE AO OR THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY DUE TO THE FACT THAT HE WAS SICK AND 3 UNDER MEDICAL TREATMENT. ON A PERUSAL OF THE COPIES OF THE VARIOUS MEDICAL PAPERS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION TH AT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FROM APPEARING BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES IN THE MATTER OF LEVY OF PENALTY. IN OU R HUMBLE OPINION, NATURAL JUSTICE DEMANDS THAT THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR PRESENTING HIS CASE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIE S. WE ARE ALSO OF THE OPINION THAT INTEREST OF THE REVENUE WOULD NOT BE A DVERSELY EFFECTED BY SETTING ASIDE THIS MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS WE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 18 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2010. SD/- SD/- (D. MANMOHAN) (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. MUMBAI, DATED : 18 TH JUNE, 2010. WAKODE COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T. 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, B-BENCH (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER AS STT.REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI.