SHOP 245 SEVEN INDIA LATD, MUMBAI v. DCIT 8(2), MUMBAI

ITA 5032/MUM/2009 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 503219914 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AACCP1555A
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 5032/MUM/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 12 day(s)
Appellant SHOP 245 SEVEN INDIA LATD, MUMBAI
Respondent DCIT 8(2), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 16-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted E
Tribunal Order Date 16-03-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 10-03-2011
Next Hearing Date 10-03-2011
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 03-09-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL AM AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO JM ITA NO.5032/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2004-2005 M/S.SHOP 24 SEVEN INDIA LIMITED IN CENTRE 49/50 MIDC 12 TH ROAD ANDHERI (EAST) MUMBAI 400 020. PAN : AACCP1555A. VS. THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 8(2) MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI KESHAV BHUJLE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI HEMANT LAL O R D E R PER R.S.SYAL AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 26.06.2009 IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-2005 . 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF DISALLOWANCE OF LOSS OF RS.2 85 81 400 RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAVING PASSED U/S.144 AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) NOT ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FI LED BEFORE HIM. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FURNISH ED ITS RETURN DECLARING LOSS OF RS.2.85 CRORES. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER S INCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE NECESSARY EVIDENCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAMED AS SESSMENT U/S.144 AND THE LOSS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY AT RS.2.85 CRORES WAS NOT ALLOWED. IN THE FIRST APPEAL THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE A. O. IN FRAMING ASSESSMENT U/S.144 AND ALSO SOUGHT TO FILE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN SUPP ORT OF ITS CLAIM OF LOSS. THE LEARNED CIT(A) REFUSED TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVID ENCE AND UPHELD THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ON RECORD TWO PAPER BOOKS CONSISTING OF SEVERAL ITA NO.5032/MUM/2009 M/S.SHOP 24 SEVAN INDIA LIMITED. 2 PAGES. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED A.R. THAT TH E ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ALLOW ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUPPO RT THE LOSS CLAIMED BY IT. IT WAS PUT FORTH THAT THE CASE WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING AN D ON THE VERY FIRST INSTANCE THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED DETAILS IN PART. WHEN THE ASSESS EE APPROACHED THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE SECOND DAY OF HEARING THE LEARNED A .R. EXPLAINED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER INFORMED ABOUT THE CHANGE IN THE JURISDICTION OF THE CASE. THEREAFTER THE DISALLOWANCE OF LOSS WAS MADE. WITHO UT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION THE ENDS OF JUSTIC E WOULD MEET ADEQUATELY IF THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTO RED TO THE FILE OF A.O. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY AND DIRECT HIM TO MAKE ASSESSMENT AFRES H AS PER LAW AFTER ALLOWING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE. NEEDLESS TO SAY THE ASSESSEE WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO LEAD ANY FRESH EVIDENCE IN TH E DE NOVO PROCEEDINGS. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 16 TH DAY OF MARCH 2011 . SD/- SD/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI : 16 TH MARCH 2011. DEVDAS* COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) VII MUMBAI. 5. THE DR/ITAT MUMBAI. 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI.