KHUSHNUMA M. KUTAR, MUMBAI v. I.T.O. WARD 12(2)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 3700/MUM/2009 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 15-04-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 370019914 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AADPK1730A
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 3700/MUM/2009
Duration Of Justice 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
Appellant KHUSHNUMA M. KUTAR, MUMBAI
Respondent I.T.O. WARD 12(2)(3), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 15-04-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 15-04-2010
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 08-06-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH MUMBAI. BEFORE SHRI R.V.EASWAR SR.VP AND SHRI J.SUDHAKAR R EDDY AM I.T.A. NO.3700/MUM/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06) KHUSHNUMA M.KUTAR C/O.SHIRISH H.SHAH & CO. 1/2 MANGROL MANSION 6 RUSTOM SIDHWA MARG FORT MUMBAI-400 001. PAN:AADPK1730A VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 12(2)(3) MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MR. AKASH JADHAV RESPONDENT BY : MR. MANVENDRA GOYAL DR O R D E R PER R.V.EASWAR SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY TH E CIT(A) DISMISSING HIS APPEAL. 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED A PENALTY OF RS.10 000/- UPON THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE HIM IN R ESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(2) AND 142(1). THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR DESPITE SEVERAL NOTICES. HE ALSO CONFIRMED THE LEVY OF PENALTY ON MERITS. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS AND THE RIVAL SUBMI SSIONS. THE ASSESSEE HAS DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO THE STATEME NT OF FACTS FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) IN WHICH THE REASONS WHICH PREVENTED HIM FROM APPEARING BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE HAVE BEEN SET OUT IN THE FORM OF A CHART . WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE SAME AND WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE S REPRESENTATIVE WHO WAS DULY INFORMED OF THE NOTICE S BY THE ASSESSEE WAS PROFESSIONALLY PRE-OCCUPIED AND THERE FORE COULD NOT ATTEND THE HEARINGS. ON ONE OCCASION HE COULD N OT ATTEND THE HEARING BECAUSE HIS BROTHER-IN-LAW HAD TO BE AD MITTED IN ITA NO.3700/M/09 2 HOSPITAL. IT SEEMS TO US THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKE N SUFFICIENT CARE TO COMPLY WITH THE NOTICES BY INFORMING HIS RE PRESENTATIVE AND THAT IT WAS ONLY BECAUSE OF THE INABILITY FOR VALID REASONS OF THE REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE HEARINGS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WENT UNATTENDED. IN OUR OPINION THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE DEFAULTS AND THE CASE DOES NOT JUSTIF Y LEVY OF PENALTY. WE THEREFORE CANCEL THE SAME AND ALLOW THE APPEAL. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 15 TH DAY OF APRIL 2010. SD/- (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) SD/- ( R.V.EASWAR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SENIOR VICE PRES IDENT MUMBAI DATED 15 TH APRIL 2010. SOMU COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT-XII MUMBAI. 4. THE CIT(A)-XII MUMBAI 5. THE DR A BENCH /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDE R ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T MUMBAI