Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

M/s Ompowertech Associates & Contractors Pvt. Ltd.,302, Vardhan Apartment,Nanda Patkar Road, Vs. ITO Wd. 7(1)-2, Aayakar Bhavan,Mumbai 400 020.
June, 14th 2012
           IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                MUMBAI BENCHES " C ", MUMBAI

          BEFORE SHRI DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL, JM
                 AND SHRI RAJENDRA, A.M.

                     ITA No. : 7956/Mum/2010
                     Assessment Year : 2002-03

M/s Ompowertech Associates &                   ITO Wd. 7(1)-2,
Contractors Pvt. Ltd.,                         Aayakar Bhavan,
302, Vardhan Apartment,                        Mumbai ­ 400 020.
Nanda Patkar Road,
                                     Vs.
Vile Parle (E),
Mumbai ­ 400057.
PAN NO: AAACO 3051 C
            (Appellant)                               (Respondent)

                     Appellant by          :    None
                   Respondent by           :    Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

                   Date of hearing         :    12-6-2012
           Date of Pronouncement           :    12-6-2012


                             ORDER


PER DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL, JM :


     This appeal preferred by the assessee is directed against the

order dated 28-7-2010 passed by the ld. CIT(A)- 13, Mumbai for the

assessment year 2002-03.


2.   In this case, the appeal was fixed for hearing on 4-6-2012. On

4-6-2012, a short adjournment was sought by the assessee on the

ground that the appeal is under preparation and the counsel is busy.
                                    2
                                                ITA No : 7956/Mum/2010


Accordingly the case was adjourned to 12-6-2012.         On 12-6-2012,

again adjournment was sought on the ground that the counsel for the

assessee is out of station. Since the adjournment was already granted

at the request of the assessee and in the absence of any power of

attorney, the Bench rejected the adjournment application filed by the

assessee and it was decided to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the

assessee on merits after hearing the ld. D.R.







3.    Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee company is a

contractor. The return was filed declaring total income of Rs. 32,620/-.

However, the assessment was completed at an income of Rs.

53,93,490/- vide order dtd. 28-3-2005 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income

Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).   On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) provided various

opportunities to the assessee.      However, in the absence of any

compliance by the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) after considering the remand

report submitted by the A.O. while observing that the assessee has not

paid self assessment tax of Rs. 11,645/- as per return of income filed

by it and in the absence of books of accounts, vide his ex parte order

held that the A.O. was justified in estimating the profit and making the

disallowance/addition and accordingly dismissed the appeal.
                                      3
                                                 ITA No : 7956/Mum/2010


4.    Being aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in

appeal before us challenging in all the grounds the sustenance of

addition/disallowance made by the A.O.


5.    At the time of hearing the ld. D.R. while relying on the order of

A.O. and the ld. CIT(A) submits that he has no objection if the appeal is

restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A).


6.    We have carefully considered the submissions of the ld. D.R. and

perused the material available on record. We find that in this case,

inspite of various opportunities provided to the assessee, the ld. CIT(A)

has dismissed the assessee's appeal on the ground that the assessee

has not paid self assessment tax of Rs. 11,645/- and has not produced

the books of accounts. In the absence of any material to show that the

assessee was asked to produce the books of accounts and keeping in

view that the assessee in the Memorandum of Appeal i.e. (Form No. 35)

filed before the ld. CIT(A) mentioned that the admitted tax of Rs.

11,645/- has duly been deposited, we are of the view that the ld. CIT(A)

was not justified in dismissing the assessee's appeal without providing

specific opportunity of being heard to the assessee. This being so and

keeping in view the interests of justice, we consider it fair and

reasonable that the matter should go back to the file of the ld. CIT(A)

and accordingly we set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and

send back the matter to his file to decide the same afresh and
                                     4
                                                  ITA No : 7956/Mum/2010







according to law after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to

the assessee.    All the grounds taken by the assessee are, therefore,

partly allowed for statistical purpose.



4.     In the result, the assessee's appeal stands partly allowed for
statistical purpose.


       Order pronounced in the open court on 12th day of June, 2012.

                                                     sd
               Sd/-
           ( RAJENDRA )                    ( DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL )
       ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                        JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai, Dt: 12.06.2012.



Copy   forwarded to :
  1.    The Appellant,
  2.    The Respondent,
  3.    The C.I.T. ­ 7, Mumbai
  4.    CIT (A) ­ 13, Mumbai.
  5.    The DR,       - Bench, ITAT, Mumbai

                   //True Copy//
                                                     BY ORDER



                                              ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
                                          ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai
RK
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting