RONIT CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD., MUMBAI V. ITO 4 (2)(1), MUMBAI

MA 341/MUM/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Ronit Capital Management Ltd, which filed a miscellaneous application against an ex-parte order passed by the ITAT. The ex-parte order was a result of the assessee's non-representation in earlier hearings. The assessee argued that notices were sent to an old address and that they had appointed a new advocate who was supposed to represent them. The Department of Revenue opposed the recall of the ex-parte order, citing the assessee's negligence in not attending the hearings or filing for adjournments. The Tribunal, after considering the circumstances and the principles of substantial justice, decided to recall the ex-parte order but imposed a cost to be deposited in the Prime Minister's Relief Fund as a condition for the recall.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 123326 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 12-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 21-11-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No.341/Mum/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.6679/Mum/2019) (Assessment Year : 2012-13) M/s Ronit Capital Management Limited Anamika Apartment Shop No.4, S.V. Road Jawahar Nagar, Goregaon - West Mumbai-MH 400 062IN Vs. Income-tax Officer-4(2)(1) Mumbai PAN :AAACH9239D Assessee by : Shri Dharmesh Shah Revenue by : Shri Chetan M Kacha, Sr.AR Date of Hearing : 13/01/2023 Date of pronouncement : 20/01/2023 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This miscellaneous application has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 07 th Septembr,2022 passed by the ITAT in ITA No.6679/Mum/2019 for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Ld.Counsel of the assessee submitted that due to non representation on behalf of the assessee exparte order has been passed. He submitted th was earlier operated from address 233, Shreeji Industrial Estate, Subhash Road, Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai submitted that since the company business in later years, therefore, said office premises were shifted to Anamika Apartment, Shop No.4, S.V. Road, 29/C, Jawahar Road, Goregaon (W), Mumbai been sent at the old address, therefore, the the notices. In the affidavit, the director of the company, Shri Hemant Shirodkar has further mentioned that no procedure for change of address was advised to him by his representative. He has further mentioned in his assessee had appointed Adv. Bhanu Pratap Singh and therefore, he was under the impression that he would represent the case regularly in the case. given to the Advocate, he was under the bonafid would represent before the Tribunal. 3. On the other hand, the Ld. exparte order. He submitted that this case was fixed for hearing since 17 th May, 2021 and, thereafter it was fixed on i.e. 26/07/2021, 29/09/2021, 09 04 th May, 2022 & 07 M/s Ronit Capital Management Ltd The Ld.Counsel of the assessee submitted that due to non representation on behalf of the assessee before the Tribunal, exparte order has been passed. He submitted that the company was earlier operated from address 233, Shreeji Industrial Estate, Subhash Road, Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai-400 060 submitted that since the company was not doing much of the business in later years, therefore, said office premises were shifted to Anamika Apartment, Shop No.4, S.V. Road, 29/C, Jawahar Road, Goregaon (W), Mumbai and notices of hearing might have been sent at the old address, therefore, the company did not receive the notices. In the affidavit, the director of the company, Shri Hemant Shirodkar has further mentioned that no procedure for change of address was advised to him by his representative. He has further mentioned in his affidavit that the assessee had appointed Adv. Bhanu Pratap Singh and therefore, he was under the impression that he would represent the case regularly in the case. According to him, in view of the authority given to the Advocate, he was under the bonafide belief that he would represent before the Tribunal. On the other hand, the Ld. DR objected to recalling the exparte order. He submitted that this case was fixed for hearing May, 2021 and, thereafter it was fixed on i.e. 26/07/2021, 29/09/2021, 09 th September, 2021, 27/01/2022, May, 2022 & 07 th September, 2022. However, neither anyone M/s Ronit Capital Management Ltd M.A. 341/Mum/2022 2 The Ld.Counsel of the assessee submitted that due to non before the Tribunal, at the company was earlier operated from address 233, Shreeji Industrial Estate, 400 060. He further not doing much of the business in later years, therefore, said office premises were shifted to Anamika Apartment, Shop No.4, S.V. Road, 29/C, Jawahar notices of hearing might have company did not receive the notices. In the affidavit, the director of the company, Shri Hemant Shirodkar has further mentioned that no procedure for change of address was advised to him by his authorized affidavit that the assessee had appointed Adv. Bhanu Pratap Singh and therefore, he was under the impression that he would represent the case According to him, in view of the authority e belief that he DR objected to recalling the exparte order. He submitted that this case was fixed for hearing May, 2021 and, thereafter it was fixed on various dates, September, 2021, 27/01/2022, September, 2022. However, neither anyone attended on behalf of the assessee on those dates of hearing nor any adjournment application was filed. Accordin assessee is negligent in his conduct and, therefore, he has strongly objected for recalling the matter for fresh hearing. 4. We have heard the rival submissions of the parties and perused the relevant record. We find that though the Director the company, in his affidavit has submitted that Adv. Bhanu Pratap Singh was authorized f find that on various dates since 17 assessee had been notified by way of registered post compliance either by way of representation by the authorized representative of the assessee or by way of any adjournment application has been made by the assessee. Regarding the change of address, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee was asked as to whet was there any change in the registered office address of the assessee, he could not provide any convincing response. The Ld. Counsel also could not explain whether said address on which notices were issued is registered office address of the company. the circumstances, we are of the opinion that due to sheer negligence on the part of the assessee, resources and time of the Tribunal has been consumed. substantial justice, we feel it appropriate to recall the exparte or of the Tribunal subject to a cost of Rs.10,000/ deposited by the assessee in the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund. The M/s Ronit Capital Management Ltd attended on behalf of the assessee on those dates of hearing nor any adjournment application was filed. Accordin assessee is negligent in his conduct and, therefore, he has strongly objected for recalling the matter for fresh hearing. We have heard the rival submissions of the parties and perused the relevant record. We find that though the Director the company, in his affidavit has submitted that Adv. Bhanu Pratap Singh was authorized for appearing, on perusal of the record we find that on various dates since 17 th May, 2021, been notified by way of registered post compliance either by way of representation by the authorized representative of the assessee or by way of any adjournment application has been made by the assessee. Regarding the change Counsel of the assessee was asked as to whet was there any change in the registered office address of the assessee, he could not provide any convincing response. The Ld. Counsel also could not explain whether said address on which notices were issued is registered office address of the company. the circumstances, we are of the opinion that due to sheer negligence on the part of the assessee, resources and time of the Tribunal has been consumed. But, still in the interest of substantial justice, we feel it appropriate to recall the exparte or of the Tribunal subject to a cost of Rs.10,000/- deposited by the assessee in the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund. The M/s Ronit Capital Management Ltd M.A. 341/Mum/2022 3 attended on behalf of the assessee on those dates of hearing nor any adjournment application was filed. According to him, the assessee is negligent in his conduct and, therefore, he has strongly We have heard the rival submissions of the parties and perused the relevant record. We find that though the Director of the company, in his affidavit has submitted that Adv. Bhanu Pratap n perusal of the record we May, 2021, despite the been notified by way of registered post, however, no compliance either by way of representation by the authorized representative of the assessee or by way of any adjournment application has been made by the assessee. Regarding the change Counsel of the assessee was asked as to whether was there any change in the registered office address of the assessee, he could not provide any convincing response. The Ld. Counsel also could not explain whether said address on which notices were issued is registered office address of the company. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that due to sheer negligence on the part of the assessee, resources and time of the But, still in the interest of substantial justice, we feel it appropriate to recall the exparte order which shall be deposited by the assessee in the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund. The assessee is directed to furnish receipt of payment into the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund before the appointed date of he appeal on 20 th March, 2023. open court, no separate notice of hearing shall be issued to the parties. 5. In the result, miscellaneous application of the assessee is allowed subject to above terms. Order pronounced the ITAT Rules, 1963 on Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 20/01/2023 Pavanan, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy// M/s Ronit Capital Management Ltd assessee is directed to furnish receipt of payment into the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund before the appointed date of he March, 2023. Since the date was announced in the open court, no separate notice of hearing shall be issued to the In the result, miscellaneous application of the assessee is allowed subject to above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court/under Rule 34(4) of the ITAT Rules, 1963 on 20/01/2023. Sd/ AMIT SHUKLA) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Sr. Private Secretary) ITAT, Mumbai M/s Ronit Capital Management Ltd M.A. 341/Mum/2022 4 assessee is directed to furnish receipt of payment into the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund before the appointed date of hearing of Since the date was announced in the open court, no separate notice of hearing shall be issued to the In the result, miscellaneous application of the assessee is under Rule 34(4) of Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Sr. Private Secretary) ITAT, Mumbai