MANISHA ENTERPRISES, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER 26(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 7095/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9685 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 14-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 22

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 7095MUM/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI D BENCH, MUMBAI [CORAM: JUSTICE P. P. BHATT (PRESIDENT) AND PRAMOD KUMAR (VICE PRESIDENT)] ITA NO. 7095/MUM/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10 MANISHA ENTERPRISES .APPELLANT 19 - M.K. BROS. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, A.K ROAD, JARIMARI, MUMBAI 400022 [PAN:AAIFM2433K ] VS INCOME TAX OFFICER 26(2)(2) MUMBAI ..........RESPONDENT APPEARANCES: NONE FOR THE APPELLANT BHARAT ANDHALE FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING: : DECEMBER 22 ND , 2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : DECEMBER 22 ND , 2020 O R D E R PER BENCH : 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CALLED INTO QUESTION CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 29.09.2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) - 38, MUMB AI IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10. 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS TAKING UP FOR HEARING TODAY IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 3 DAYS. IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT CONTENTION SET OUT BELOW: ITA NO. 7095MUM/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10 PAGE 2 OF 3 I , MRS. MANISHA VISHNUDAS KAMAT PARTNER, HAVING HER OFFICE AT MANISHA ENTERPRISES, 19, M.K.BROTHERS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, A. K.ROAD, JARIMARI, MUMBAI - 400 072 HAVE TO STATE AS UNDER ; 1. I SAY THAT THE FIRM IS ASSESSED TO TAX REGULARLY UNDER P.A. NO. AAIFM2433K. 2 . I SAY, THAT TH E APPELLATE ORDER PASSED BY THE C.I.T(A) WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 12/10/2017. 3. I SAY THAT I WAS NOT IN MUMBAI TILL THE 13TH DECEMBER, 2017. 4. I SAY THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 14 - 12 - 2017. WHATEVER STATED ABOVE AND IN THE APPLICATION IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY K NOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. 3. T HE ASSESSEE WISHES TO OPT FOR VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME AND HE CAN DO SO ONLY UPON THE DELAY BEING CONDONED AND THE APPEAL BEING ADJUDICATED ON MERITS. IN ANY CASE, HAVING PERUSED THE PETITION, WE ARE SATISFIED ABOUT BONAFIDES OF DELAY. 4. SHRI BHARAT ANDHALE , DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES SUBMITS THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE DELAY BEING CONDONED ONLY FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE IS OPTING FOR SETTLEMENT OF PENDING DISPUTE UNDER VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME . IT IS FOR THIS SHORT REASON THAT HE IS NOT OPPOSING THE CONDONATION PETITION. 5. IN VIEW OF THE DISCUSSIONS AND BEARING IN MIND THE ENTIRETY OF THE MATTER, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON MERITS. IN THE MEANTIME, AS IS THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN AN ASSURANC E TO US - WHICH IS TAKEN ON RECORD, THE ASSESSEE MAY OPT FOR SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE UNDER VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME . ORDER ACCORDINGLY. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 22 ND DECEMBER , 20 20 S D / - S D / - JUSTICE P. P. BHATT PRAMOD KUMAR (PRESIDENT) (VICE PRESIDENT) MUMBAI, DATED THE 22 ND DAY OF DECEMBER , 2020 N.V, SR.PS ITA NO. 7095MUM/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10 PAGE 3 OF 3 COPIES TO: (1) THE APPLICANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI