M/S GAGAN TRADING CO.LTD, Mumbai V. THE ACIT 5(2), Mumbai

ITA 886/MUM/2004

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8635 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 11 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2004
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRAVAN KUMAR
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH A,MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL (AM) & SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHA VAN (JM) I.T.A.NO.4051/MUM/2009 (A.Y. 2004-05) SHRI LAXMANKUMAR R. DAGA, 5 TH FLOOR, 18/22, SHEIKH MEMON ST., MUMBAI-400 002. PAN : AEFPD1221D VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER-14(1)-1, AAYKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBI-400 020. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI VIPUL JOSHI. RESPONDENT BY SHRI S HRAVAN KUMAR. O R D E R PER R.S. SYAL, AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 29-04-2009 UPHOLDING THE PENALTY U /S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IN RELATION TO THE ASSTT. YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE FIRST GROUND OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS REG ARDING THE DENIAL OF ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY BY THE LD. CIT(A). A PAPER BO OK CONSISTING OF 24 PAGES HAS BEEN FILED AND THERE IS APPLICATION FROM THE ASSESS EE FOR THE ADMISSION OF SUCH ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 29 OF THE ITAT RULES . THE LD. A.R. CONTENDED THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE NOW PROPOSED TO BE FILED TH ROUGH THIS PAPER BOOK COMPRISING OF 24 PAGES HAS DIRECT BEARING ON THE QU ESTION OF IMPOSITION OF PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C). IT WAS, THEREFORE, PRAYED TH AT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BE ADMITTED. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS NOTED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED EX PARTE. IN VIEW ITA NO.4051/M/09 2 OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS FILING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AT THE STAGE OF THE TRIBUNAL, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, IT WOULD BE JU ST AND FAIR IF THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO TH E FILE OF AO. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY AND DIRECT HIM TO DECIDE THE QUESTION O F PENALTY AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEAR D TO THE ASSESSEE.. NEEDLESS TO SAY THE ASSESSEE WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO LEAD ANY EVIDENCE IN HIS SUPPORT DURING SUCH FRESH PROCEEDINGS. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2 011. SD/- SD/- (SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) (R.S. SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI: 28TH JANUARY , 2011. NG: COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE. 2. DEPARTMENT. 3 CIT(A)-XIV,MUMBAI. 4 CIT,CITY-14,MUMBAI. 5.DR,A BENCH,MUMBAI. 6.MASTER FILE. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER, ASST.REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI. ITA NO.4051/M/09 3 DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNA TION 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 20-01-2011 SR.PS/ 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 20-01-2011 SR.PS/ 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/ AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/ 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/ 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS/ 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER *