GARRISON PHARMA (I) LTD, MUMBAI v. ITO WD 5(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 7169/MUM/2012 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2015 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 716919914 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN AAACG0568N
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 7169/MUM/2012
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant GARRISON PHARMA (I) LTD, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO WD 5(1)(2), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 27-04-2015
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 27-04-2015
Date Of Final Hearing 27-04-2015
Next Hearing Date 27-04-2015
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 03-12-2012
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH G MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 7169/M/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 9 - 1 0 M/S. GARRISON PHARMA (INDIA) LTD. 30 - A CHAMPA GALI OFFICE NO.1/2 ZAVERI BAZAR MUMBAI 400 012 PAN: AAACG0568N VS. ITO WD 5(1)(2) MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI LOVE KUMAR D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 2 7 .04. 201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.04.2015 O R D E R PER VIJAY PAL RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 13 .0 8 .201 2 OF CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 9 - 1 0. THE ASSESSEE H AS RAISED THE FOLLOW ING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: (A) THAT THE LEARNED (ITCA) HAS PASSED ORDER UNDER SECTION 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL LODGE BY APPELLANT BUT ARBITRALLY AND INVIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PASSING OF ORDER EX - PARTE AN D CONTENTS OF HIS NOTICE; (B) THAT THE LEARNED CIT (APPEAL) HAS TOTALLY IGNORED THE DIRECTION PROVIDED BY HON'BLE COURTS FOR PASSING OF THE JUDGMENT AND HAS PASSED THE ORDER. (C) THAT THE LEAR N ED CIT (APPEAL) HAS PASSED THE ORDER WITHOUT POINTING ITA NO.7169/M/2012 M/S. GARRISON PHARMA (INDIA) LTD. 2 OUT T HE LAWS ON WHICH HON 1 BLE CIT (APPEAL) RELY AND THEREBY VIOLATED THE RULES OF AUDI ALTERM PARTUM OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND PASSED THE IMPUG N ED ORDER. (D) THAT THE LEARNED CIT (APPEAL) HAS NOT GONE THROUGH ITS RECORD AND THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE APPELLANT DURING THE PROCESS OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL AND PASSED THE IMPUG N ED ORDER IN VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF DISCREATION; PRINCIPLES OF FAIRNESS PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE BUT ARBITRALLY IN A POWER CHARGED MANNER; (E) THAT THE IMPUGNE D ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT (APPEAL) ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW. S HARE APPLICATION MONEY (F) THAT THE LEARNED CIT (APPEAL) HAS ERRED BY CONSIDERING THE SUM OF RS. 80 00 000/ - OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AS CASH CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 WHICH AS PER LAW DO NOT PERMIT 2. NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING DESPITE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH RPAD. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT EVEN ON THE EARLIER OCCASIONS ON 10.02.14 AS WELL AS ON 15.12.14 NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY NOTICES WERE ISSUED THROUGH RPAD TO THE ASSESSEE. DESPITE REPEATED NOTICES ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE THE ASSESSEE CHOSE NOT TO APPEAR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT THE ASSESSME NT IN THIS CASE WAS FRAMED UNDER SECTION 144 BECAUSE NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR AND PERUSE THE A PPEAL EVEN BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DECIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) EX - PARTE THOUGH ON MERITS. THEREFORE IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING HIS CASE EITHER BEFORE THE A SSESSING O FFICER (AO) OR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) OR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL DESPITE REPEATED NOTICES HENCE WE PROPOSE TO HEAR AND DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX - PARTE. ITA NO.7169/M/2012 M/S. GARRISON PHARMA (INDIA) LTD. 3 GROUND NO S .(A) TO (E) 3. THESE GROUNDS ARE RAISED AGAINST THE EX - PARTE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT( A) AND VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEARED AND TO SUBSTANTIATE THE GROUNDS NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE US AS TO HOW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS VIOLATED THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE THEREFORE WE DO NOT FIND ANY M ERIT OR SUBSTANCE IN THE GROUND NOS.(A) TO (E) OF THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY THE GROUND NOS.(A) TO (E) OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ARE DISMISSED BEING DEVOID OF MERITS. GROUND NO.(F) 4. THE GROUND NO.(F) IS THE ONLY SUBSTANTIVE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE REGARDING ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. D.R. AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RELEVANT RECORD INCLUDING THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THERE WAS A SURVEY CONDUCTED BY THE INVESTIGATION TEAM OF THE DEPARTMENT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 21.03.06 IN CONNECTION WITH THE SEARCH ACTION ON ELDER PHARMACEUTICAL GROUP OF COMPANIES. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY STATEMENT OF ONE MR. VINOD R. RANA DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPAN Y WAS RECORDED WHEREIN HE INTER - ALIA STATED IN THE ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.8 THAT THE CAPITAL INTRODUCED IN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS BY BOGUS COMPANIES AND THE ENTIRE INVESTMENT WAS BOGUS. THE AO VERIFIED THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WHEREIN TH E SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AS ON 31.03.09 IS SHOWN AT RS.2 00 02 790/ - AS AGAINST RS.1 20 02 79 0 / - AS ON 31.03.08 THUS THERE WAS AN INCREASE OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY TO THE TUNE OF RS.80 00 000/ - DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE SAID INCREAS E OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE OR DOCUMENTARY PROOF. T HE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR EITHER BEFORE THE AO OR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND EVEN BEFORE US TO FILE ANY ITA NO.7169/M/2012 M/S. GARRISON PHARMA (INDIA) LTD. 4 EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS.80 00 000/ - SHOW N AS INCREASE IN TH E SHARE APPLICATION MONEY T HEREFORE WE FIND THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY OF RS.80 00 000/ - IS JUSTIFIED BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS THE IDENTITY OF THE SHARE APPLICANT AS WELL AS THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR/ALLEGED APPLICANT. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED DURING THE SURVEY THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ADMITTED THAT THE ENTIRE INVESTMENTS IN THE SHAPE OF S HARE APPLICATION MONEY IS BOGUS THEREFORE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONTRARY FACT OR RECORD BROUGHT BEFORE US WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR OR ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . O RDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27. 04. 201 5 . SD/ - SD/ - ( R.C. SHARMA ) ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI DATED: 27. 04.2015 . * KISHORE SR. P.S. COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT CONCERNED MUMBAI THE CIT ( A) CONCERNED MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI.