NAYANA PANCHAL, MUMBAI V. ITO 25(1)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 767/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 88593 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURINDERJEET SINGH
• Section: 263; 144

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER / I .T.A. NO . 767/MUM/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 MRS. NAYANA PANCHAL, 16, SINDHI CHAWL, DAULAT NAGAR, ROAD NO. 6, BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI - 400 066 / VS. THE CIT - 25, MUMBAI ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AICPP 0500E ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: NONE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SURINDER JEET SINGH / DATE OF HEARING : 19 . 0 3 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 .03 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT - 25, MUMBAI DT. 10.3.2011 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 MADE U/S. 263 OF THE ACT. 2. THE SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT ERRED IN PASSING THE ORDER U/S. 263 O F THE ACT. ITA. NO. 767/M/2012 2 3. THE APPEAL IS LATE BY 261 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPLICATION FOR THE CONDONATION OF THE DELAY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE CONTENTS OF THE AFFIDAVIT. THE MAIN REASON GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IS THAT HE WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT ORDER OF CIT U/S. 263 IS NOT APPEALABLE. BEFORE PROCEEDING FURTHER, LET US SEE THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS CASE, THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT WAS PASSED U/S. 144 OF THE ACT. THE CIT EXERCISING HIS REVISIONARY JURISDICTION U/S. 263 OF THE ACT SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT VIDE HIS ORDER DT. 10.3.2011. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PREFER ANY APPEAL AGAINST THIS ORDER OF THE CIT MADE U/S. 263 OF THE ACT AT THAT POINT OF TIME. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE OFFICER PASSED ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 144 R.W. SEC. 263 OF THE ACT. IN THE MEANTIME, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH WAS SET ASIDE BY THE CIT U/S. 263 OF THE ACT. 5. THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 917/M/2010 TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS INFRUCTUOUS VIDE O RDER DT. 25.1.2012. AFTER RECEIVING THIS ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT U/S. 263 OF THE ACT ON 3.2.2012 THEREBY MAKING APPEAL LATE BY 261 DAYS. THIS CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE IS TOTALLY DEVOID OF BONAFIDE. CONSIDERING TH E CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE AS DISCUSSED HEREINABOVE, WE DECLINE TO CONDONE THE DELAY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. OR DER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 1 9 TH MARCH, 2015 . SD/ - SD/ - ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 19 TH MARCH, 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS ITA. NO. 767/M/2012 3 / 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