DOSHI HOLDINGS P.LTD, V. ASST CIT CIR 5(1),

MA 27/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3276 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEIL PHILIPS SR
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI - D - BENCH , , BEFORE S/SH. I P BANSAL,JUDICIAL MEM BER & RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /. MA NO.27/MUM/201 5 , A/O/O ITA NO.7614/M/ 12 / ASSESSMENT YEAR - 20 0 9 - 10 DOSHI HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. 58 NARIMAN BHAVAN, NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI - 400 021. PAN: AABCM 0243 P VS ASST. CIT CIR. 5(1) AAYKAR B HAVAN,M K ROAD, MUMBAI - 20 ( / A PPLICANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) /A PPLICANT BY :SHRI JAYESH DADIA / REVENUE BY :SHRI NEIL PHILIPS SR. A R / DATE OF HEARING : 08 - 0 5 - 2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 - 0 6 - 2015 , 1961 254 ( 1 ) ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT,1961(ACT) PER RAJENDRA, AM - VIDE ITS APPLICATION D ATED 3.2. 20 15 THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS STATED THAT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ABOVE MENTIONED Y E A R WAS DISPOSED OFF ON 27.11.2013 BY THE TRIBUNAL , THAT THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL WERE NOT CORRECT, THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAD DIRECTED THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ( FAA ) TO CONSIDER THE DECISION OF THE S PECIAL B ENCH OF HY DERA BA D I N CASE OF JAGAN P UBLICATION WHICH WAS TO BE DELIVERED WHILE ADJUDICATING THE MATTER AFRESH, THAT THE DECISION OF THE SPECIAL BENCH WAS STILL PENDING, THAT THE MATTER HAD BEEN ADJOURNED SINE - DIE, THAT FAA WAS NOT LIKELY TO HEAR THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS DIRECTED BY THE TRIBUNAL , THAT THE DIRECTION RELATING TO CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF S PECIAL B ENCH SHOULD BE SUITABLY AMENDED OR DELETED. MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS NOT ACCOMPANIED BY AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE OFFICE BEARERS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY . 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE ( AR ) OF THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE AVERMENTS MADE IN THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE . DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ( DR ) STATED THAT THE APPLICATION COULD BE DECIDED ON MERITS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVA L SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL BEFORE US. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAD RESTORED THE MATTER TO T HE FILE OF FAA AS CERTAIN DOCUMENTS FURNISHED BEFORE THE FAA HAVE CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AS PER RULE 46A OF THE I.T. RULES. THE TRIBUNAL HAD DIREC TED THE FAA TO CONSIDER THE OUTCOME OF THE DECISION OF THE S PECIAL B ENCH IN THE CASE OF 2 JAGAN PUBLICATION . IN OUR OPINION, THE ORDER DATED 27.11.2013 HAS TO BE MODIFIED CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. IT IS FOUND THAT THE MAT TER OF JAGAN PUBLICATION HAS BEEN ADJOURNED SINE - DIE AND THEREFORE, THE POSSIBILITY OF NOT ADJUDICATION THE CASE BY THE FAA IS VERY HIGH. OUR INTENTION WHILE RESTORING THE MATTER TO FILE OF FAA WAS TO DIRECT THE AO TO DECIDE THE APPEAL AFRESH AFTER CONSIDE RING ALL THE DOCUMENTS PRODUCED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. THEREFORE, WE MODIFY THE LAST PORTION OF OUR ORDER DATED 27.11.2013 AND SAME SHOULD BE READ AS UNDER : WHILE FINALIZING THE APPEAL THE FAA SHOULD CONSIDER ALL THE PAPERS AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AS PER LA W . AS A RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS PARTLY ALLOWED. . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OP EN COURT ON 10 TH JUNE,2015. 10 , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( /I P BANSAL) ( / RAJENDRA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / MUMBAI, /DATE: 10 .06.2015 . . . JV . SR.PS. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT / 2. RESPONDENT / 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / 5. DR A BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / , , . . . 6. GUARD FILE/ //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , / ITAT, MUMBAI.