LAXMIPATI IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI V. ITO, WARD-1(2)1), MUMBAI

ITA 4788/MUM/2023

AI Insights

Laxmipati Impex Pvt. Ltd. appealed against the order of the CIT(A), which confirmed the validity of the reopening of the assessment for the year 2017-18. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not been represented in earlier proceedings, leading to ex-parte orders. The assessee, having ceased business operations and relocated, was unaware of the notices from the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). The Tribunal found reasonable cause for the non-representation and allowed the appeal, directing the case to be re-assessed with the newly submitted evidences.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471418 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 18-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AKSHAY TAPDIYA
• Assessee Lawyers: RAMESH MALPANI
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Reasonable cause; Reopening of assessment
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG, PRESIDENT AND SHRI BR BASKARAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA No. 4788/MUM/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Laxmipati Impex Pvt. Ltd., C/O B-804, Suman Ashish, B/H Soham Residency, Soham Circle, Althan, Surat-395 017. Vs. ITO Ward 1(2)(1), Room No. 582, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai. PAN NO. AABCL 5983 D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Ramesh Malpani Revenue by : Mr. Akshay Tapdiya, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 18/11/2024 Date of pronouncement : 21/11/2024 ORDER PER BR BASKARAN, AM The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 30.11.2023 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi it relates to assessment year 2017-18. 2. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the validity of reopening additions made by the AO. 3. This appeal was earlier vide its order dated 08.05.2024 appeared on behalf of the assessee passed ex-parte, the assessee moved which was numbered the ex-parte order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the Tribunal, vide its order dated 23.09.2024 and the appeal was restored back be placed before this Bench. 4. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer the order to best of his assessee did not appear before him. He submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has also passed ex assessee to represent before 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee was engaged in the business of export of that business. Hence years back. Further, all the Gujarat. He further submitted that the fact that assessee has closed down his business three years back has also been confirmed by the Laxmipati Impex Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 4788/MUM/2023 The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the validity of reopening of assessment and also made by the AO. was earlier disposed of by the Co-ordinate Bench vide its order dated 08.05.2024 passed ex-parte, since none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Since the above said order , the assessee moved a Miscellaneous petition numbered as MA No. 196/Mum/2024, seeking parte order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the vide its order dated 23.09.2024, recalled above said order restored back. Accordingly, this appeal came before this Bench. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer of his judgment u/s 144 of the Act assessee did not appear before him. He submitted that the Ld. also passed ex-parte order because of failure of the assessee to represent before him. submitted that the assessee was engaged in the business of export of various items and it suffered heavy losses Hence the assessee closed the business urther, all the directors shifted their residence He further submitted that the fact that assessee has closed business three years back has also been confirmed by the Laxmipati Impex Pvt. Ltd. 2 ITA No. 4788/MUM/2023 The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) in of assessment and also ordinate Bench, parte, since none . Since the above said order was a Miscellaneous petition, seeking recall of parte order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the recalled above said order this appeal came to The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer has passed judgment u/s 144 of the Act, since the assessee did not appear before him. He submitted that the Ld. parte order because of failure of the submitted that the assessee was engaged in the suffered heavy losses in business about three their residence to He further submitted that the fact that assessee has closed business three years back has also been confirmed by the report given by the Inspector who carried out the physical verification address of the assessee. were not aware of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A). He submitted that the did not inform the assessee about the proceedings. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has actually incurred losses year. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has incurred lo in the succeeding year also and it has been accepted by the AO. 6. The Ld A.R submitted that, s represent before the tax authorities, it has before the Tribunal as additional evidences income. He prayed that the addition and all the issues may be examining them afresh. 7. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions m that there was a reasonable cause for the assessee appearing before the tax authorities. Before us, filed various documents in the form of additional evidences, since they could not be filed be case discussed above, we are of the view they should be admitted and accordingly admit them. examination at the end of the AO the Ld. CIT(A) and restore all the issue Laxmipati Impex Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 4788/MUM/2023 report given by the Inspector who carried out the physical verification address of the assessee.Hence, the assessee/ di were not aware of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer as well s the Ld. CIT(A). He submitted that the earlier tax consultant did not inform the assessee about the proceedings. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has actually incurred losses The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has incurred lo in the succeeding year also and it has been accepted by the AO. 6. The Ld A.R submitted that, since the assessee could not represent before the tax authorities, it has filed various documents before the Tribunal as additional evidences in support He prayed that the additional evidences may be admitted may be restored back to the Assessing Officer for m afresh. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made by the Ld A.R, we are of the view that there was a reasonable cause for the assessee appearing before the tax authorities. Before us, the assessee has filed various documents in the form of additional evidences, since they could not be filed before the tax authorities. In the facts of the case discussed above, we are of the view they should be admitted and accordingly admit them. Since these evidences examination at the end of the AO, we set aside the order passed by restore all the issues to the file of the AO for Laxmipati Impex Pvt. Ltd. 3 ITA No. 4788/MUM/2023 report given by the Inspector who carried out the physical assessee/ directors were not aware of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer as well tax consultant also did not inform the assessee about the proceedings. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has actually incurred losses in this The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has incurred losses in the succeeding year also and it has been accepted by the AO. ince the assessee could not filed various documents in support of return of may be admitted restored back to the Assessing Officer for We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the record. Having we are of the view that there was a reasonable cause for the assessee for not the assessee has filed various documents in the form of additional evidences, since fore the tax authorities. In the facts of the case discussed above, we are of the view they should be admitted Since these evidences require we set aside the order passed by to the file of the AO for examining them afresh. We also direct the assessee to fully co operate with the Assessing Officer for expeditious assessment. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on Sd/- (JUSTICE (RETD.) PRESIDENT Mumbai; Dated: 21/11/2024 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// Laxmipati Impex Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 4788/MUM/2023 afresh. We also direct the assessee to fully co Assessing Officer for expeditious completion of the In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is nounced in the open Court on 21/11/2024. Sd/ JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG) (BR BASKARAN PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Laxmipati Impex Pvt. Ltd. 4 ITA No. 4788/MUM/2023 afresh. We also direct the assessee to fully co- completion of the In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as /11/2024. Sd/- BR BASKARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai "