ANATEK SERVICE P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6809/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1386 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 10-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR KAILASH P GAIKWAD
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.6809, 6810 & 6811/M/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 1999-2000, 2001-02 & 2002-03) M/S. ANATEK SERVICE PVT. LTD., 8, VALMIKI APARTMENTS, CST ROAD, KALINA, SANTACRUZ EAST, MUMBAI - 400 020 PAN: AAACA9079Q / VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-10(1), MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020 ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HARIDAS BHAT, A.R. REVENUE BY : DR. KAILASH P. GAIKWAD, D.R. / DATE OF HEARING : 30.01.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.04.2017 / O R D E R PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ABOVE CAPTIONED ARE THREE APPEALS RELEVANT TO THREE DIFFERENT ASSESSMENT YEARS I.E. A.Y. 1999-2000, 2001-02 & 200 2-03. ALL THE THREE APPEALS HAVE BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THREE SEPARATE O RDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] OF EVEN DATE 14.08.2014 VIDE WHICH THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE A O) UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR THESE ASSESSMENT YEARS VIDE HIS SEPARAT E ORDERS. ITA NOS.6809, 6810 & 6811/M/2014 M/S. ANATEK SERVICE PVT. LTD. 2 2. IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT APPEAL BEARING NO.6809/M/ 2014 FOR A.Y. 1999- 2000 IS RELATING TO THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 03.03.0 5 UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WHEREAS ITA NO.6810/M/2014 RELEVANT TO A.Y. 2001-02 IS RELATING TO THE ORDER DATED 16.08.04 AND ITA NO.6811/M/2014 FOR A.Y. 2002-03 IS IN RELATION TO THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 03.03.05 OF THE AO UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED HIS FIRST APPEA LS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AGAINST THE ABOVE STATED PENALTY ORDERS ON 24.06.13 , HENCE THERE WAS A LONG DELAY OF ABOUT 8 TO 9 YEARS IN FILING THE APPEAL BE FORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PROVE ANY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR S UCH A LONG DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE ONLY PLEA TAKEN WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE, TO BUY PEACE, HAD PAID THE PENALTY AMOUNT WITHOUT PURS UING ANY APPEAL AGAINST THE PENALTY ORDER. HOWEVER, IN THE MONTH OF FEBRUA RY 2013, THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE FROM THE DEPARTMENT AS TO WHY THE PROSECUTION PROCEEDINGS SHOULD NOT BE INITIATED AND THIS NOTICE PROMPTED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE APPEALS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AGAINST THE SAID PENALTY ORDERS OF THE AO. THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THIS CANNOT BE A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. HE, THEREFORE, DISMISSED THE APPEALS BEING BARRED BY LIMITATION. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES. THE LD. A.R. HAS NOT MADE ANY NEW SUBMISSION REGARDING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS EXCEPT THAT THE PENALTY WAS NOT WARRANTED IN THIS C ASE ON MERITS. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE HERE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT ONLY PAID TH E PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO BUT HAD WITH CONSCIOUS MIND CHOSEN NOT TO FILE THE APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID PENALTY ORDERS. NOW ONLY BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT HA S LAUNCHED SOME PROSECUTION PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, THAT ITSELF, CANNOT BE SAID TO BE A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY I N THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE SAME ARE UPHELD. ITA NOS.6809, 6810 & 6811/M/2014 M/S. ANATEK SERVICE PVT. LTD. 3 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE THEREFO RE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07.04.2017. SD/- SD/- ( / RAJENDRA) ( / SANJAY GARG) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI / DATED 07.04.2017 * KISHORE /COPY OF THE ORDER FORWAR COPY OF THE ORDER FORWAR COPY OF THE ORDER FORWAR COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED DED DED DED TO TOTO TO : :: : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. / THE DR CONCERNED BENCH , 6. / GUARD FILE. / // / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT, MUMBAI / ITAT, MUMBAI / ITAT, MUMBAI / ITAT, MUMBAI