ARHAM DIAMOND JEWELLERY P.LTD, MUMBAI v. ITO 5(1)(1),

ITA 2219/MUM/2014 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 221919914 RSA 2014
Assessee PAN AAFCA0219D
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 2219/MUM/2014
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 28 day(s)
Appellant ARHAM DIAMOND JEWELLERY P.LTD, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO 5(1)(1),
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 30-11-2017
Date Of Final Hearing 29-05-2017
Next Hearing Date 29-05-2017
First Hearing Date 29-05-2017
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 02-04-2014
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH JM / I .T.A. NO. 2219 / M/ 20 1 4 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 09 - 1 0 ) M/S ARHAMM DIAMOND JEWELLERY P. LTD. 1 ST FLOOR 6 SAMBHAV DARSHAN 226 RAJA MUMBAI. PIN:400004 / VS. ITO 5(1)(1) ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAFCA 0219 D ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / DATE OF HEARING : 12 .0 9 .2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : . 30.11 .2017 / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH JM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.11 .201 3 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 9 RELEVANT TO THE A.Y. 2009 - 10. 2 . THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1. THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSE D BY LD. ASSESSING OFFICER ARE WITHOUT DUE COMPLIANCE OF THE PRINCIPLE OF STARE DECISION AND THE LAWS LAID DOWN BY THE COURTS AND H ENCE IT SHOULD BE SET A S I D E; ASSESSEE BY: NONE DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI SAURABH DESHPANDE( DR) ITA. NO.2219 / M/201 4 A.Y.2009 - 10 2 2. THAT ADDITION MADE OF RS. 7 12 904/ - MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER TO RETURNED INCOME SHOULD BE SET ASIDE.; 3. THAT THE ADDITIONS OF CAR EXPENSE OF RS.3 91 757/ - ON GROUNDS AND FACTS SHOULD BE SET ASIDE. 5. THAT ON THE GROUNDS AND FACTS THE TRAVELLING EXPENSES AND HOTEL EXPENSES INCURRED ABROAD FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AMOUNTING TO RS.98 470/ - SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED AND ADDED AS INCOME. 6. THAT RS.125/ - DISALLOWED U/S 14A OF EARNING OF INTEREST INCOME ON THE SHARES OF CO - OPERATIV E BANK FROM WHERE THE APPELLANT HAS AVAILED FINANCIAL FACILITY SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED AND ADDED AS INCOME. 7. ANY OTHER GROUNDS WHICH APPELLANT RESERVED HIS RIGHTS TO ADD ALTER OR AMEND AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3 . THE BR IEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 27.09.2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.11 82 860/ - . THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. THEREAFTER THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS - 10. THE N OTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT DATED 20.08.2010 WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER THE NOTICE U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT DATED 06.01.2011 WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS CARRYING THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURER AND D EALER IN DIAMOND JEWELLERY AND CUT AND POLISHED DIAMONDS. DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN COST OF MATERIAL PURCHASED OF RS.4 72 49 526/ - AND SALE AT RS.5 61 49 812/ - . THE ASSESSEE CLAIM THE DEPRECIATION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2 22 552/ - CAR EXPENSES OF RS.3 91 757/ - TRAVELLING EXPENSES AND HOTEL EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF RS.98 470/ - AND EXPENCES TO EARN THE EXEMPT INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS.125/ - U/S 14A OF THE ITA. NO.2219 / M/201 4 A.Y.2009 - 10 3 ACT . OUT WHICH AN AMOUNT OF RS.7 12 904/ - WAS DECLINED AND INCOME OF THE ASS ESSEE WAS ASSESSED TO THE TUNE OF RS.18 95 770/ - . THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SATISFIED THEREFORE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ADDITION THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE US. 4 . WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENT ADVANCED B Y THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE US DESPITE THE SERVICE OF NOTICE THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE IS BEING PROCEEDED AGAINST EXPARTE AND THE ISSUES ARE BEING DECIDED IN VIEW OF THE MATERIAL AVAIL ABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL 45 DAYS DELAY ED. T HE ASSESSEE TOOK THE PLEA THAT THE COPY OF ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) WAS RECEIVED BY HIM DELAYED T HEREFORE THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED DELAY ED THEREFORE THE D ELAY IS LIABLE TO BE CONDONED. IN VIEW OF THE REASONS MENTIONED IN THE APPLICATION SUPPORTED BY THE AFFIDAVIT AND WE DEEM IT NECESSESSRY TO DECIDE THE MATTER ON MERITS WE CONDONED THE DELAY. O N MERITS WE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE NOWHERE FILED ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM. NO MATERIAL OF ANY KIND IN CONNECTION WITH THE DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION AND CAR EXPENSES AND TRAVELLING AND HOTEL EXPENSES AND DISALLOWANCE OF RS.125/ - U/S 14A OF THE ACT IS ON RECORD. HOWEVER THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT H AS ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM BEFORE THE AO AS WELL AS THE CIT(A) AND FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT THEREFORE AN APPEAL IS LIABLE TO ITA. NO.2219 / M/201 4 A.Y.2009 - 10 4 BE DISMISSED. ANYHOW APPARENTLY NO ONE IS REPRESENTING THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AND N O MATERIAL OF ANY KIND WAS PRODUCED BEFORE US TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE ALL THE ISSUES ARE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. 5 . IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY ORDERED TO BE DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 0. 1 1 . 2017 SD/ - SD/ - ( G.S PANNU ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 30 . 11 . 201 7 V.P.SINGH / 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. / BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) / ITAT MUMBAI