NEELESHWAR DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI V. ITO 32(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 7273/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0197 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B SATYANARAYANA RAJU
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

, SMC , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.7273/MUM/2016 : ASST.YEAR 2012-2013 M/S. NEELESHWAR DEVELOPERS SHOP NO.C-4, SAI SHAKTI COMPLEX HARISHANKAR JOSHI ROAD, DAHISAR (E) MUMBAI 400 068. PAN : AADFN9153A. / VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 32(2)(4) MUMBAI. ( / APPELLANT) ( / RESPONDENT) /APPELLANT BY : --- NONE --- /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.SATYANARAYANA RAJU (SR.DR) / DATE OF HEARING : 16.05.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.07.2017 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) DATED 29.06.2016 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER:- 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN PASSING AN EXPARTE ORDER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD RESULTING IN VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AS THE NOTICES WERE NOT ISSUED AT THE ADDRESSES MENTIONED IN FORM NO.35 BY THE ASSESSEE, HENCE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) MAY BE QUASHED. 2. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN PASSING AN EXPARTE ORDER DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT ADJUDICATING ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE. ITA NO.7273/MUM/2016. M/S.NEELESHWAR DEVELOPERS. 2 3. AO ERRED IN MAKING AN AD-HOC ADDITION OFRS.33,26,720 @ 15% ON THE COST OF PROJECT INCURRED DURING THE YEAR I.E. RS.2,05,44,236 WHICH IS AN ADDITION BASED ON PERCENTAGE COMPLETION METHOD WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT ASSESSEE IS FOLLOWING PROJECT COMPLETION METHOD FOR REVENUE RECOGNITION AND NOT PERCENTAGE COMPLETION METHOD. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER OR DELETE ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 3. AT THE THRESHOLD IT IS NOTED THAT THIS APPEAL IS TIME-BARRED BY 82 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS NEITHER FILED ANY PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF THE DELAY NOR ANYBODY HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE OF HEARING HAS RETURNED UNSERVED WITH THE REMARK `LEFT. I FURTHER NOTE THAT NOBODY HAS APPEARED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ALSO IN THIS CASE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION, THERE IS NO REASONABLE CAUSE FOR CONDONING THE DELAY IN THIS CASE. ACCORDINGLY, THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED BEING TIME-BARRED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 03 RD DAY OF JULY, 2017. SD/- ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 03 RD JULY, 2017. DEVDAS* / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. / CIT(A), MUMBAI ITA NO.7273/MUM/2016. M/S.NEELESHWAR DEVELOPERS. 3 / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. [ / GUARD FILE.