MARUTI JEWELS PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI v. ITO 12(3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 4294/MUM/2019 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 02-03-2021 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 429419914 RSA 2019
Assessee PAN AAECM2549R
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 4294/MUM/2019
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
Appellant MARUTI JEWELS PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO 12(3)(3), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 02-03-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 02-03-2021
Last Hearing Date 16-02-2021
First Hearing Date 16-02-2021
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 20-06-2019
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO. 4294/MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 MARUTI JEWELS PVT. LTD. 6 TH FLOOR 6170 BHARAT DIAMOND BOURSE TOWER NO. JE BKC BANDRA (E) MUMBAI-400 051. VS. ITO 12(3)(3) ROOM NO. 224 2 ND FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAVAN NEW MARINE LINES MUMBAI-400 020. PAN NO. AAECM 2549 R APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VERMA DR DATE OF HEARING : 16/02/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02/03/2021 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVA NT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2010-11. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER O F THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-20 MUMBAI [IN SHORT CIT(A)] AND ARISES OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE I NCOME TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT). THOUGH THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 15.12.2020 AND 16.02.2021 NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT IVE APPEARED BEFORE THE BENCH ON THE ABOVE DATES. AS THERE IS NON-COMPLIANC E BY THE ASSESSEE WE ARE ITA NO. 4294/M/2019 MARUTI JEWELS PVT. LTD. 2 PROCEEDING TO DISPOSE OFF THIS APPEAL AFTER EXAMINI NG THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND HEARING THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE (DR). 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE READ AS UNDER : 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANTS CA SE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED PROVIDING AN O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANTS C ASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT U/S 147BY ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 WHICH IS MERELY DUE TO CHANGE OF OPINION AND TH EREFORE THE REOPENING IS BAD IN LAW. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANTS C ASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT U/S 147 BY ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 DATED 09.06.2016 WHICH IS BARRED BY LIMITATION IN VIEW OF THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 147 OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961. 4. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANTS E ASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A)ERRED IN CONFIRMING THAT THE APPELLANT HAS EN TERED INTO ACCOMMODATION TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASES WITH SHRI RAJENDRA JAIN G ROUP. SANJAY CHOUDHARY GROUP AND DHARMICHAND JAIN GROUP WITHOUT ANY MATERI AL EVIDENCE ON RECORD. 5. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANTS C ASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 15 895/- B EING ALLEGED NON-GENUINE PURCHASES FROM M/S KANGAN JEWELS PVT. LTD. BY INVOK ING SECTION 69C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. AS PER PARA 14 OF THE IMPUGNE D ORDER. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2010-11 ON 30.1 1.2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.8 74 350/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) PASSED AN ORDER U/S 143(3) ON 14.03.2013 ASSESSING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.10 75 620/-. SUBSEQUENTLY THE AO RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX (INV) MUMBAI AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL ITA NO. 4294/M/2019 MARUTI JEWELS PVT. LTD. 3 CIRCLE-4 SURAT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN ACCOMMO DATION ENTRIES ON PURCHASES. ACCORDINGLY HE ISSUED NOTICE U/S 148 DA TED 09.06.2016 TO THE ASSESSEE AND PASSED AN ORDER DATED 18.12.2017 U/S 1 43(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.11 91 520/-. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE AO THE ASSESSEE F ILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). WE FIND THAT VIDE ORDER DATED 29.03.2019 THE LD. CIT(A) PASSED AN EX-PARTE ORDER DISMISSING THE APPEAL. HE HAS MENTIONED THAT THOUGH THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 14.03.2019 22.03.2019 AND 28.03.2019 NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE. REITERATING THE ORDER OF THE AO THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. BEFORE US THE LD. DR SUPPORTS THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIALS ON RECORD. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE AO HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.1 15 895/- TREATING IT AS ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASES. THERE IS NO MENTION IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHETHER THE NOTICES ISSUED BY HIS OFFICE FIX ING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 14.03.2019 22.03.2019 AND 28.03.2019 WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE OR NOT. A NOTICE INTIMATING THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING IS TO BE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIM TO PASS A DE NOVO ORDER AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE DIRE CT THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS/EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) O N THE DATE OF HEARING. ITA NO. 4294/M/2019 MARUTI JEWELS PVT. LTD. 4 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02/03/2021. SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (N.K. PRADHAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED: 02/03/2021 RAHUL SHARMA SR. P.S. 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./ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) ITAT MUMBAI