ITO - 4(2)(1), MUMBAI V. M. W. CORP. PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

MA 141/MUM/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4449 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect; Tax effect

Judgement Text

म ु ंबई ठ “ड ” , ए ं ओम " # ंत, %& % म' IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “ D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO.141/MUM/2021 [ Arising out of ITA NO.6689/MUM/2017(A.Y.2012-13 ) ] Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(2)(1), Room No.644, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... " ( /Applicant बन म Vs. M/s. M.W. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 99, Niranjan, Marine Drive, Marine Lines, Mumbai 400 002. PAN:AAFCM-1365-G ..... " त /Respondent " ( + / Applicant by : Shri B.K.Bagchi " त + /Respondent by : None ु न ई , त / Date of hearing : 06/05/2022 -./ , त / Date of pronouncement : 12/05/2022 %#/ ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: The Revenue has filed this Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (in short 'the Act'), seeking recall of the order dated 28/09/2020, whereby appeal of the Revenue was dismissed on account of low tax effect. 2 MA NO.141/MUM/2021 2. Shri B.K.Bagchi representing the Department submitted that the appeal was dismissed on account of low tax effect, whereas the tax effect involved in the present case is more than Rs.1.00 core i.e. much more than the threshold limit specified in Circular No.17/2019 dated 08/08/2019. There is a mistake apparent on record in the order of Tribunal, therefore, the order dated 28/09/2020 be recalled. 3. We have heard the submissions made by ld. Departmental Representative. Notice of hearing to this miscellaneous application was sent to the assessee /respondent through RPAD on eight occasions. The notice was sent to the assessee on the address mentioned in Form No.36. The notices sent has not been received back unserved from the Postal Authorities, hence, deemed to be served. Despite service of notice assessee has failed to appear in the proceedings. It is relevant to mention here that even in appeal proceedings, the assessee never appeared and the appeal was decided ex- parte. It seems that the assessee is not keen to pursue the matter, therefore, the miscellaneous application is decided with the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative and the material available on record. 4. The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed on account of low tax effect based on the working furnished by the ld. Departmental Representative at the time of hearing of the appeal. As per the working available on record furnished at the time of hearing of the appeal, the tax effect involved was Rs.49,80,220/-. Now the ld. Departmental Representative has furnished revised working as received from the Assessing Officer. As per the revised working the tax effect involved in appeal is Rs.1,05,55,774/- i.e. beyond the limit specified in CBDT Circular No.17/2019(supra). Thus, in the light of revised working furnished by the ld. Departmental Representative, the order 3 MA NO.141/MUM/2021 dated 28/09/2020 is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number for adjudication on merits. 4. The Registry is directed to list the appeal for fresh hearing in due course after notice to both the sides. 5. In the result, appeal by the Revenue stands allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on Thursday the 12 th day of May, 2022 Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (VIKAS AWASTHY) %& /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER म ु ंबई/ Mumbai, 0 न ं /Dated 12/05/2022 Vm, Sr. PS(O/S) त ल प अ े षतCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. (/The Appellant , 2. " त / The Respondent. 3. ु 1त( )/ The CIT(A)- 4. ु 1त CIT 5. 4 5 " त न , . . ., म ु बंई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. 5 ड7 8 9 /Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai