MUHTA MARKFIN (P) LIMITED, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -5(2)(3), MUMBAI

MA 357/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7540 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: APPLICANT

Judgement Text

P A G E | 1 M.A. NO.357/MUM/2018 (ARISING OUT ITA NO.6555/MUM/2017) M/S MUTHA MARKFIN (P) LTD. VS. ITO WARD - 5(2)(3), A.Y. 2009 - 10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, M UMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM M.A. NO. 357/MUM/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.6555/MUM/2017 ) ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10) M/S MUTHA MARKFIN (P) LTD. 59/61,4 TH FLOOR, KUMBHARWADA, PRABHU RAM MANDIR MARG, MUMBAI 400 004 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 5(2)(3) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, 5 TH FLOOR, ROOM NO. 566 MUMBAI 400 020 ./ ./ PAN NO. AABCM0146P ( / APPLICANT) BY : ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPLICANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI UODAL RAJ SINGH , SR.D.R / DATE OF HEARING : 11 .10.2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 6 . 10.2019 / O R D E R PER RAVISH SOOD, JM: THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ARISES FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING OFF ITS APPEAL I.E M/S MUTHA MARKFIN P. LTD. VS. ITO WARD - 5(2)(3), MUMBAI, ITA NO.6555/MUM/2017, DATED 07.02.2018. P A G E | 2 M.A. NO.357/MUM/2018 (ARISING OUT ITA NO.6555/MUM/2017) M/S MUTHA MARKFIN (P) LTD. VS. ITO WARD - 5(2)(3), A.Y. 2009 - 10 2. AS THE AS SESSEE DESPITE HAVING BEEN AFFORDED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY HAD FAILED TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE BEFORE US, THEREFORE , THE MATTER IS BEING PROCEEDED WITH ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS DISCERNIBLE FROM THE APPLICATION AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. AS C AN BE GATHERED FROM THE APPLICATION, IT IS THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT AS IT HAD FAILED TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE ON THE DATE ON WHICH THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL I.E ON 01.02.2018 , THEREFORE, THE SAME WAS DISPOSED OF F ON AN EX - PARTE BASIS . THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINING THE REASON LEADING TO THE FAILURE ON ITS PART TO APPEAR ON THE STIPULATED DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL SUBMITTED, THAT THE SAME HAD OCCASIONED, FOR THE REASON, THAT THE NOTICE INTIMATING THE FIXATION OF THE S AID APPEAL WAS NOT RECEIVED BY IT. ON THE BASIS OF THE AFORESAID FACTS, IT IS THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE , THAT THE APPEAL HAD BEEN DISPOSED OFF BY THE TRIBUNAL WITHOUT AFFORDING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO IT FOR PUTTING UP AN APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. 4. T HE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (FOR SHORT D.R) OBJECTED TO THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. D.R , THAT THE FACTS STATED IN THE APPLICATION WERE INCORRECT. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY HIM THAT THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARI NG OF THE APPEAL I.E ON 01.02.2018 WAS DULY REPRESENTED BY HIS COUNSEL SHRI S. SR IR AM. IN ORDER TO FORTIFY HIS AFORESAID CONTENTION, THE LD. D .R HAD DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED IN ITA 6555/MUM/2017, DATED 07.02.2018. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE , AND ALSO PERUSED THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS IS DISCERNIBLE FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIZ. MUTHA MARKFIN PVT. LTD. VS. ITO - 5(2)(3), MUMBAI, I TA NO.6555/MUM/2017, DATED 07.02.2018 FOR A.Y. 2009 - 10, THE ASSESSEE IN THE COURSE OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS DULY REPRESENTED BY ITS COUNSEL SHRI S. SRI R AM. T HE PRES ENCE OF THE SAID COUNSEL IS RECORDED IN THE O RDER SHEET. APART THERE FROM, A PERUS AL OF THE RECORDS REVEALS THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD DULY AUTHORIZED THE AFORESAID COUNSEL FOR APPEARING IN THE SAID APPEAL (COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD). IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID FACTS, WE ARE PERSUADED TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE CLAIM OF THE LD. D.R THAT THE PRESENT APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS BASED ON WRONG FACTS, WHICH ARE FOUND TO CLEARLY MILITATE AGAINST THOSE BORNE FROM THE RECORDS. AS THE ASSESSEE IN THE COURSE OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS REPRESENTED BY HI S AUTHORIZED COUNSEL SHRI S. SRI R AM, THEREFORE, WE FIND NO MERIT IN ITS CLAIM P A G E | 3 M.A. NO.357/MUM/2018 (ARISING OUT ITA NO.6555/MUM/2017) M/S MUTHA MARKFIN (P) LTD. VS. ITO WARD - 5(2)(3), A.Y. 2009 - 10 THAT THE APPEAL WAS DISPOSED OF F WITHOUT PUTTING IT TO NOTICE AS REGARDS THE FIXATION OF THE SAME . WE THUS NOT FINDING ANY MERIT IN THE AFORESAID APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE , DIS MISS THE SAME. 5. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 6 . 10.2019 S D / - S D / - (SHAMIM YAHYA) (RAVISH SOOD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; 16 .10.2019 PS. ROHIT / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI P A G E | 4 M.A. NO.357/MUM/2018 (ARISING OUT ITA NO.6555/MUM/2017) M/S MUTHA MARKFIN (P) LTD. VS. ITO WARD - 5(2)(3), A.Y. 2009 - 10