MIHIR BIPIN PAREKH, MUMBAI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 16(2), MUMBAI

MA 691/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6458 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 22-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH B, MU MBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. 691/MUM/2017 IN ITA NO. 3377/MUM/2012 (A.Y.-20 06-07) & M.A. NO. 692/MUM/2017 ITA NO. 7332/MUM/2012 (A.Y.-2 008-09) SHRI MIHIR BIPIN PAREKH RUBY MANSION, 2 ND FLOOR, 9, FORJET CROSS LANE, GOWALIA TANK, MUMBAI-400036 PAN: AADPP4223D VS. THE DCIT CIRCLE 16(2), 2 ND FLOOR, MATRU MANDIR INCOME TAX, OPP. BHATIA HOSPITAL, MUMBAI-400007. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.C. TIWARI WITH MS. RUTUJA N. PAWAR (AR) REVENUE BY : SHRI V. VIDHYADHAR (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 09.03.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.04.2018 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. THESE TWO MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ARE FILED BY AS SESSEE FOR SEEKING THE RECALL OF ORDER DATED 14.06.2017. IN THE APPLICATIO N, THE ASSESSEE HAS PLEADED THAT THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DISMISSED VID E ORDER DATED 14.06.2017 BY APPLYING THE RATIO OF DECISION OF MUMBAI TRIBUNAL I N CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.) LTD., 38 ITD 230. THE APPLIC ANT/ASSESSEE FURTHER PLEADED THAT HE COULD NOT REPRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL DUE TO MISCOMMUNICATION WITH CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. THE ASS ESSEE CAME TO KNOW ABOUT THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL ON THE SERVICE OF ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL. M.A. NO.691 & 692/M/2017- SHRI MIHIR BIPIN PAREKH 2 2. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE A RGUED THAT THE NON- APPEARANCE OF REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NE ITHER INTENTIONAL NOR DELIBERATE. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED HIS AFFIDAVIT TH AT NON-APPEARANCE ON 31.03.2017 WAS NOT INTENTIONAL. HOWEVER, IT WAS DUE TO PROPER COMMUNICATION WITH CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE L D. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE SUBMITS THAT THE TRI BUNAL PASSED THE ORDER AFTER APPRECIATING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD . THE APPLICATION FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DEVOID OF MERIT AND DESERVES TO BE DISM ISSED. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF BOTH THE PARTI ES AND PERUSED THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2017. PERUSAL OF RECORD REVEALS THAT SH RI IJEET FERNANDES APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE, WHO SOUGHT AN ADJOURNMENT ON THE GROUND THAT CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT IS TRAVELLING. THE GROUND OF A DJOURNMENT WAS VAGUE, THUS, ADJOURNMENT WAS DECLINED. SHRI IJEET FERNANDE S WAS ASKED TO ASSIST THE BENCH, HOWEVER, HE EXPRESSED HIS INABILITY. THUS, T HE BENCH LEFT NO OPTION EXCEPT TO PROCEED ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABL E ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED BOTH THE APPEAL IN THE YEAR 2012. THE ASS ESSEE IS SEEKING ADJOURNMENT ON ONE PRETEXT OR THE OTHER SINCE BEGIN NING. NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IS F ILED ON RECORD. WE HAVE NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPLI CATION ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED BY APPLYING THE RATIO OF DECIS ION OF MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.) LTD. (SUPRA) IN THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2017. THE PRESENT APPLICATIONS ARE FILED IN A CASUAL MANNER. THE CONTENTION OF THE APP LICATION IS CONTRARY TO THE M.A. NO.691 & 692/M/2017- SHRI MIHIR BIPIN PAREKH 3 CONTENTS OF ORDER DATED 14.06.2017. THERE IS NO REF ERENCE OF DECISION OF MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.) LTD. (SUPRA). HOWEVER, KEEPI NG IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND INVOKING THE POWER UNDER RULE 2 4 OF INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES 1963, THE ORDER DATED 14 .06.2017 IS RECALLED. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FULLY CO-OPERATE AND NOT TO SEEK ADJOURNMENT WITHOUT ANY VALID AND PROPER REASON AND SHALL FILE THE NECE SSARY EVIDENCE, IF ANY ON RECORD, WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAY. IN CASE FURTHER ADJOURNMENT IS SOUGHT ON FRIVOLOUS GROUNDS, THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE BURDENED W ITH HEAVY COST. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE ALLOWED. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX BOTH THE APPEALS FOR HEARING BY REG ULAR BENCH. PARTIES BE INFORMED THROUGH PROPER NOTICE. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND DAY OF APRIL 2018. SD/- SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED 02/04/2018 S.K.PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, (ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY/