M/S MICRO TUBES, Mumbai V. ITO WARD 19 (2)(3), Mumbai

MA 03/MUM/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9753 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 04-01-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANPREET SINGH DUGGAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES SMC , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JM) M .A. N O. 03 / MUM /2021 ( ARISING OUT OF ITA N O. 1837 /MUM /201 9 ) ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011 12 ) M/S MICRO TUBES, C/O JAGDISH BANSAL & ASSOCIATES, ROOM NO. 1231/3, NA VJIVAN COMMERCIAL PREMISES, LAMINGTON ROAD, MUMBAI - 400008 PAN: AAGFM4351A VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(2)(3), MATRU MANDIR, TARDEO, MUMBAI - 40007 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI MANPREET SINGH DUGGAL (D R) DATE OF HEARING: 02 /07 /20 21 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20 / 0 7 /20 21 O R D E R BY WAY OF THIS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT RECALL OF ORDER DATED 22.06.2020 PASSED IN ITA NO. 1837/MUM/2019. 2. WHEN TH E AFORESAID APPLICATION WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT THE CASE. IT IS EVIDENT ON RECORD , ON EARLIER OCCASIONS ALSO WHEN THIS APPLICATION WAS FOR FIXED FOR HEARING, NONE APPEARE D FOR THE ASSESSEE. C ON TINUOUS ABSE NCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES LACK OF INTEREST IN PURSUING THE MATTER. THEREFORE, I PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPLICATION EX - PARTE QUA TH E ASSESSEE AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 3. HEARD THE LEARNED D EPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON R ECORD. AS COULD BE SEEN FROM RECORD, THE APPEAL FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) WAS NOT ADJUDICATED ON MERITS, BUT WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE DUE TO NON FILING OF THE APPEAL 2 M.A. NO . 03/MUM/2021 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2011 - 12 ELECTRONICALLY. C ONSIDERING THE FACT THAT LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) HAS NOT DECIDED THE ISSUES ON MERIT AND HAS DISMISSED THE AP PEAL PURELY ON TECHNICAL GROUND, T HE TRIBUNAL DECIDED TO RE STORE THE MATTER BACK TO LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) FOR ADJU DICATING THE APPEAL ON MERIT AFTER DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WHILE DOING SO, THE TRIBUNAL DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY AS PER THE S TATUTORY MANDATE. THUS, FROM THE AFORESA ID FACTS, IT IS VERY MUCH CLEAR THAT BEING OF THE VIEW THAT ASSESSEES APPEAL BEFORE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY DESE RVES TO BE ADJUDICATED ON MERIT, T HE TRIBUNAL HAS RES TORED THE MATTER BACK TO LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). THUS, NEITHER, I FIND ANY MISTAKE IN THE AFORESAID DIRE CTIO N OF THE TRIBUNAL NOR AM I ABLE TO FATHOM HOW THE ASSESSEE CAN BE AGGRIEVED WITH THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL , AS , THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL, RATHER , GIVES A FRESH OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO R EPRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEAL S). IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID, I DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE PRESENT APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPLICATION IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH JULY, 2021 . SD/ - (SAKTIJIT DEY) JUDICIA L MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED: 20 / 0 7 /2021 ALINDRA, PS 3 M.A. NO . 03/MUM/2021 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2011 - 12 / 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