LALIT KUMAR M SHARMA, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR- 6(1), MUMBAI

MA 100/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Lalit Kumar M Sharma, the assessee, who filed Miscellaneous Applications under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the Tribunal's earlier orders regarding the estimation of commission income from a cheque discounting business for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The Tribunal had previously upheld a commission income rate of 1% and dismissed similar applications citing no apparent error. The current applications were dismissed due to the absence of the assessee's representation and the lack of merit in challenging a previously dismissed application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 124788 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-11-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 08-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 26-01-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM M A N o s . 1 00 & 1 0 1/ M u m/ 20 2 3 (A ri s i n g ou t o f M A N os. 476 & 477 / M u m/ 2 0 1 9) (A ri s i n g ou t o f IT A N os. 197 4 & 19 75 / M u m/ 20 1 7 ) ( A s s e ss me nt Y ea rs : 2008 -0 9 & 20 0 9 -1 0 ) Lalit Kumar M Sharma 128/132 Cavel Street, 1 st Floor, Room No. 13, Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai-400 002 V s. DCIT, Central Circle-6(1) Mumbai P A N / G I R N o. AA I P S 53 58 P (Applicant) : (Respondent) Applicant by : None Respondent by : Shri Mahita Nair D a te o f H e a r i n g : 09.06.2023 D ate of P ro n ou n ce me n t : 06.11.2023 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These Miscellaneous Applications have been filed by the assessee/applicant u/s. 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act' for short), relevant to Assessment Years (A.Y. for short) 2008-09 & 2009-10. The assessee has filed the Miscellaneous Applications challenging the ex parte order of the Tribunal in MA Nos. 476 & 477/Mum/2019 vide order dated 04.05.2022. 2. As there was no representation on behalf to the assessee, we hereby proceed to dispose of this miscellaneous applications by hearing the learned Departmental Representative ('ld.DR' for short) and on perusal of the materials available on record. 3. The brief facts are that the assessee had filed the Miscellaneous Applications challenging the order of the lower authorities on estimating the commission income of cheque discounting business @ 2% and 1% respectively in ITA Nos. 1974 & 2 M A N o s . 1 0 0 & 1 0 1 / M u m / 2 0 2 3 ( A . Y s . 2 0 0 8 - 0 9 & 2 0 0 9 - 1 0 ) Lalit Kumar M Sharma vs. DCIT 1975/Mum/2017 relevant to the A.Ys. 2008-09 and 2009-10. The Tribunal vide order dated 10.04.2019 upheld the commission income @ 1% after duly considering the submission of the assessee. The assessee had filed the Miscellaneous Applications challenging the order of the Tribunal dated 10.04.2019. The co-ordinate bench vide order dated 04.05.2022 dismissed the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee vide an ex parte order. The assessee has filed these Miscellaneous Applications challenging the order of the Tribunal in the earlier Miscellaneous Applications dated 04.05.2022 passed by the Tribunal. 4. We have heard ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the assessee has earlier challenged the order of the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal dated 10.04.2019 by way of Miscellaneous Applications. The co-ordinate bench had dismissed the same on the ground that there was no error apparent on the record. It is pertinent to point out that neither the assessee nor his authorized representative has been appearing before us inspite of several opportunities. The assessee is challenging the order passed in Miscellaneous Application by another Miscellaneous Application which does not warrant merit. We do not find any error apparent in the order of the Tribunal. We are, therefore, inclined to dismiss the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee. 5. In the result, both the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 06.11.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Amarjit Singh) (Kavitha Rajagopal) Accountant Member Judicial Member Mumbai; Dated : 06.11.2023 Roshani , Sr. PS 3 M A N o s . 1 0 0 & 1 0 1 / M u m / 2 0 2 3 ( A . Y s . 2 0 0 8 - 0 9 & 2 0 0 9 - 1 0 ) Lalit Kumar M Sharma vs. DCIT Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT - concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai