ASHOK G. CHAUHAN, MUMBAI V. ACIT 20 ( 1 ), MUMBAI

MA 726/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9637 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABDUL HAKEEM
• Assessee Lawyers: VASANTIBEN PATEL
• Keywords: Bonafide belief; Set aside

Judgement Text

P A G E | 1 M.A. NO.726/MUM/2018 AY. 2011 - 12 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 2876/MUM/2016) ASHOK G. CHAUHAN VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 20(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO. 726/MUM/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 2876 /MUM/2016) (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2011 - 12 ) ASHOK G. CHAUHAN FLAT NO. B - 301, VEENA BEENA ACHARYA DHONE MARG, SEWREE, MUMBAI - 400 027 VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 20 (1) MUMBAI . PAN AABPC 7897A (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY: MS. V ASANTIBEN PATEL, A.R RESPONDENT BY: SHRI ABDUL HAKEEM , SR. D.R DATE OF HEARING: 03 .05 .2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 0 3 .0 7 .2019 O R D E R PER RAVISH SOOD, JM : THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 11.12.2018 ARISES FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL ,VIZ. SHRI ASHOK GOVINDJI CHAUHAN VS. ACIT, 20(1), MUMBAI, IN ITA NO. 28 76 /MUM/2016, DATED 24.07.2018 FOR A.Y. 2011 - 12. 2. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (FOR SHORT A.R) FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET OF THE HEARING OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED , THAT AS THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAD FAILED TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THEREFORE, THE SAME WAS DISPOSED OFF BY THE TRIBUNAL BY WAY OF AN EX - PARTE ORDER AS PER RULE 24 OF THE P A G E | 2 M.A. NO.726/MUM/2018 AY. 2011 - 12 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 2876/MUM/2016) ASHOK G. CHAUHAN VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 20(1) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, AFTER PERUSING T HE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND HEARING THE RESPONDENT REVENUE. THE LD. A.R SUBMITTED, THAT AS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT WAS FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL VIZ. ITAT A BENCH , MUMBAI, IN ITA NO. 1309/MUM/2016, DATE D 14.07.2017 FOR A.Y. 2010 - 11 WHEREIN SUBSTANTIVE ADDITIONS WERE MADE WAS PENDIN G BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THEREFORE, ON EARLIER OCCASIONS THE HEARING OF THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R , THAT AS THE ASSESSEE REMAIN ED UNDER A BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT THE APPEAL FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WOULD BE ADJOURNED TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR A.Y. 2010 - 11, THEREFORE, ON THE STIPULATED DATE OF HEARING OF THE PRESENT APPEAL I.E AS ON 24.07.2018 , HE HAD FOR THE SAID BONAFIDE REASON FAILED TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R THAT AS THE FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS BACKED BY A BONAFIDE REASON, THEREFORE, IN ALL FAIRNESS THE EX - PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THE APPEAL BE RESTORED. 3. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (FOR SHORT D.R) OBJECTED TO THE SEEKING OF RESTORATION OF THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS AVERRED BY THE LD. D.R THAT AS THE APPEAL HAD BEEN DISPOSED OFF BY THE TRIBUNAL ON MERITS, THEREFORE, THE AFORESAID REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MERIT ACCEPTANCE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES FOR BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD . A DMITTEDLY, AS THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE ON THE STIPULATED DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THEREFORE, THE TRIBUNAL WAS CONSTRAINED TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL AS PER RU LE 24 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, AFTER PERUSING THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND P A G E | 3 M.A. NO.726/MUM/2018 AY. 2011 - 12 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 2876/MUM/2016) ASHOK G. CHAUHAN VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 20(1) HEARING THE RESPONDENT REVENUE. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE CLAIM OF THE LD. A.R , THAT THE FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE ON THE STIPULATED DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS BACKED BY A BONAFIDE REASON , AND FIND SUBSTANTIAL FORCE IN THE SAME. IT IS THE CLAIM THE LD. A.R , THAT AS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBU NAL IN A . Y. 2010 - 11, WHEREIN SUBSTAN TIVE ADDITION WAS MADE , WAS PENDING DISPOSAL, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAD REMAINED UNDER A BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WOULD BE ADJOURNED TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE AFORE SAID MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR A.Y. 2010 - 11. ON A PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS, WE FIND THAT ON AN EARLIER OCCASION THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS ADJOURNED BY THE TRIBUNAL AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE, VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 24.04.2019 . AS IS DISCERNIBLE FROM THE AFORESAID LETTER DATED 24.04.2019, THE ASSESSEE HAD REQUESTED THAT AS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR A.Y. 2010 - 11 WAS PENDING DISPOSAL, THEREFORE, THE APPEAL FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION I.E A.Y. 2011 - 12 MAY B E TAKEN UP AFTER THE DISPOSAL OF THE SAID MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR THE AFORE SAID PRECEDING YEAR. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE CLAIM OF THE LD. A.R THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FOR BONAFIDE REASONS FAILED TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL ON 24.07.2018 CARR IES SUBSTANTIAL FORCE , AND THE SAME CANNOT BE DISCARDED AS BEING IN T H E NATURE OF AN EYE WASH. 5. ON THE BASIS OF OUR AFORESAID OBSERVATION S, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW , THAT AS THE ASSESSEE FOR BONAFIDE REASONS HAD FAILED TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THEREFORE, THE APPLICATION FILED BY HIM SEEKING RESTOR ATION OF THE APPEAL P A G E | 4 M.A. NO.726/MUM/2018 AY. 2011 - 12 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 2876/MUM/2016) ASHOK G. CHAUHAN VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 20(1) MERITS ACCEPTANCE. WE THUS SET ASIDE THE AFORESAID EX - PARTE ORDER DATED 24.07.2018 AND R ESTORE THE APPEAL. 6. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO RE - FIX THE HEARING OF APPEAL. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 3 . 0 7 .2019 S D / - S D / - ( G.MANJUNATHA) (RAVISH SOOD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; 03 .0 7 .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