RUSTOM ICE & COLD STORAGE CO, MUMBAI V. JCIT6 22(2), NAVI MUMBAI

ITA 7368/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3696 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 29-12-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B S BIST

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES D, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) ITA NO. 7368/MUM/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 RUSTOM ICE & COLD STORAGE CO. T-15, CUSROW BAUG, S.B.ROAD, COLABA, MUMBAI- 400005. PAN- AAAFR7586D VS. THE JCIT - 22(2), VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI. PRAKASH PANDIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. B.S.BIST DATE OF HEARING: 03/03/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 03/03/2016 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 01/11/2012 PASSED BY LD CIT(A)-33, MUMBAI FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEAR 2009- 10. 2. THE LD COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT THE PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ON ONE OCCASION. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO SOME UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCE S, THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT SHORT ADJOURNMENTS ON OTHER OCCASIONS. WHEN THE LAS T HEARING WAS FIXED BY THE LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE HIM, BUT H EARING COULD NOT TAKE PLACE. 2 ITA NO. 7368/MUM/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 3. ACCORDINGLY THE ASSESSEE DECIDED TO FILE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND THE SAME WAS SENT BY THE E-MAIL TO LD. CIT(A) ON 08/11/2012. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED THE ORDER OF LD.CIT (A) DT. 09/11/2012. AC CORDINGLY, LD AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PROVIDED ADEQUATE OPPORTU NITY TO SUPPORT ITS CASE. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSE SSES HAS FURNISHED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION THROUGH E-MAIL AFTER THE ORDER W AS PASSED BY THE LD.CIT (A). 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WE NOTICE THAT, THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY WAY OF E-MAIL BEFORE RECEIPT OF ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A). HENCE WE FIND THAT T HE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THE ORDER HAD BEEN PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AT THE TIME OF FILING WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS THROUGH E-MAIL. FROM THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE HAVE NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GIVEN PROPER OPPO RTUNITY TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). HENCE IN THE INTEREST OF NAT URAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE PROVIDED WITH AN OPPORT UNITY TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILE D TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ON MANY OCCASIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT T HE ASSESSEE SHOULD PAY COST TO THE DEPARTMENT. ACCORDINGLY WE IMPOSE A COST OF RS. 2,000/- ON THE ASSESSEE, WHICH SHALL BE PAID TO THE ACCOUNT OF INC OME TAX DEPARTMENT ON OR BEFORE 15/03/2016. SUBJECT TO THE PAYMENT OF ABOVE COST, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS RESTORED TO FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A), WITH THE DIRECT ION THAT LD. CIT(A) SHALL DISPOSE OF ALL THE ISSUES AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUN ITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO CO-OPERATE WITH T HE LD. CIT(A) BY FURNISHING ALL THE DETAILS AND EXPLANATIONS WHICH MAY BE CALLE D FOR BY HIM FOR EXPEDIOUS DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS T REATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 3 ITA NO. 7368/MUM/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3R D MARCH, 2016 SD/- SD/- ( B.R.BASKARAN ) (RAM LAL NEGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED: 03/03/2016 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. / CIT 5. !' , $ !'% , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. &' ( / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, ) //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI PRAMILA