MENORA CORPORATION, MUMBAI V. DCIT- 22 (1), MUMBAI

ITA 7488/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6036 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JYOTHILAKSHMI NAYAK
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATH , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 7488 / MUM . /201 8 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 09 10 ) MENORA CORPORATION 101, TITAN HOUSE, M.P. VAIDYA MARG GHATKOPAR (E), MUMBAI 400 077 PAN AAOFM6800A . APPELLANT V/S DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 22(1), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : S MT. JYOTHILAKSHMI NAYAK DATE OF HEARING 2 1 .01.2020 DATE OF ORDER 14.02.2020 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY. J.M. THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 4 TH OCTOBER 2018, PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 25, MUMBAI, CONFIRMING THE PENALTY IMPOSED OF ` 4,55,517 UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT 'THE ACT' ). 2. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT THE CASE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE. 2 MENORA CORPORATION THERE IS NO APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING ADJOURNMENT EITHER. THEREFORE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL R EPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AS COULD BE SEEN FROM THE FACTS ON RECORD, WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE COUPLE OF ADDITIONS AGGREGATING TO ` 14,74,163. ON THE BASIS OF SUCH ADDITION S , THE ASSESSING OFFICE R IN ITIATED PROCEEDING FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT AND ULTIMATELY PASSED AN ORDER ON 20 TH SEPTEMBER 2013, IMPOSING PENALTY OF ` 4,55,517, UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. AGAINST THE PENALTY ORDER SO PASSED, THE ASSE SSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). HOWEVER, DUE TO REPEATED ADJOURN MENT SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE, LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OFF ASSESSEES APPEAL EX PARTE BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER CONFIRMING THE PENALTY IMPOSED UND ER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. HAVING PERUSED TH E FACTS ON RECORD AND CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE DESERVES AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADVANCE HIS CASE AGAINST THE IMPOSITION OF PENALT Y UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WHICH COULD NOT BE AVAILED DUE TO EX PARTE DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL BY LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). 3 MENORA CORPORATION WITHOUT ENTERING INTO THE CONTROVERSY OF FOR WHOSE FAULT THE APPEAL WAS DISPOSED OFF EX PARTE, WE ARE INCLINED TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AND RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. AT THE SAME TIME, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO RESPOND TO THE NOTIC E OF HEARING AND CO OPERATE IN DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL WITHOUT SEEKING ANY UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT. WITH THE AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS, GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED I N THE OPEN C OURT ON 14.02.2020 SD/ - G. MANJUNATH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - SAKTIJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 14.02.2020 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE; (2) THE REVENUE; (3) THE CIT(A); (4) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; (5) THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; (6) GUARD FILE . TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI