MEGA CUSTODIAL SERVICES LIMITED , MUMBAI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-10(2)(2), MUMBAI

MA 199/MUM/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 103 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8558 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-11-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 22-09-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 14-07-2022
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA.No. 199/MUM/2022 [ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 633/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2013-14)] M/s. Mega Custodial Services Limited 301, Level-3, Ceejay House Shiv Sagar Estate, F-Block Dr. Annie Besant Road Worli, Mumbai – 400018 PAN: AAACM3508J v. DCIT – Circle-10(2)(2) Room No. 209, 2nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Navneet Choudhary Department Represented by : Shri Mahita Nair Date of Hearing : 23.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.11.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. Through this Miscellaneous Application assessee is seeking for rectification of certain mistakes crept in the order passed by the Tribunal in ITA.No. 633/MUM/2018 dated 28.06.2022 for the A.Y. 2013-14 and requested for suitable amendment in the Tribunal order. 2 MA.No. 199/MUM/2022 M/s. Mega Custodial Services Limited 2. At the time of hearing, Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that assessee has raised ground on disallowance of expenditure incurred by the assessee on legal and professional fee for an amount of ₹.40,00,000/- It was submitted that ITAT has allowed ₹.15,00,000/- incurred and paid to M/s. India Infoline Finance Limited whereas Tribunal has disallowed for payments made to M/s. Subhuti Estates Pvt. Ltd.,. In this regard, Ld. AR brought to our notice Para No. 20 of the Tribunal order to submit that Hon'ble bench has observed that in support of the genuineness of the claim of the above expenditure, except the submissions that these are incurred for arranging loans and no other supporting documentary evidences were submitted. 3. In this regard, Ld. AR submitted that the matter was heard on 24.05.2022 and subsequently continued the hearing on 31.05.2022 and assessee submitted details relating to M/s. India Infoline Finance Limited and the matter was declared as heard and the assessee could not submit the invoices and agreement between the assessee and M/s. Subhuti Estates Pvt. Ltd.,. Ld. AR submitted that assessee is in possession of all the documentary evidences and agreement entered into with M/s. Subhuti Estates Pvt. Ltd., but unfortunately no opportunity was given to the assessee to present the same during the hearing. Ld. AR submitted that 3 MA.No. 199/MUM/2022 M/s. Mega Custodial Services Limited in the interest of justice the above said ground needs to be adjudicated and he filed the relevant documents as an additional evidences and prayed that in the interest of justice the order may be rectified. 4. On the other hand, Ld. DR objected to the additional evidences submitted during the hearing of Miscellaneous Application. It is fact on record that none of the documents were submitted before tax authorities as well as at the time of original hearing of the appeal. Further, Ld.DR submitted that the above evidences and remitting issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer also will lead to review of the order. Since there is no mistake apparent on record, the Hon'ble Bench cannot review the above its own order. 5. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, it is clear from the submissions of the Ld. AR that assessee has not filed any documentation before tax authorities and also at the time of original hearing of appeal no documents are filed before us. This fact was clearly brought on record and now in Miscellaneous Application assessee tries to impress upon that all these documents were available and he failed to submit at the time of original hearing of appeal. From the record, we noticed that assessee has never filed these documents before the 4 MA.No. 199/MUM/2022 M/s. Mega Custodial Services Limited Assessing Officer and First Appellate Authority, if at all assessee has to submit before us it could have filed as an additional evidence in the original hearing. However, now in the Miscellaneous Application Ld.AR tries to impress upon that it was available at the time of original hearing. However, due to the reasons discussed in the Miscellaneous Application he could not file the same. Since these documents are not submitted as an additional evidence in the original appeal hearing and now entertaining such additional evidences in Miscellaneous Application will certainly leads to review of our own order. It is the responsibility of the assessee to submit the various evidences at the right forum at the right time, at this stage we are not inclined to entertain any such documentation. Therefore, we are inclined to reject the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee. 6. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 14 th November, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (ABY T. VARKEY) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai / Dated 14/11/2022 Giridhar, Sr.PS 5 MA.No. 199/MUM/2022 M/s. Mega Custodial Services Limited Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Mumbai. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mum