YASHOMANGAL PROPERTY, CONSULTANT P. LTD, MUMBAI v. ITO WD 9(3)(4), MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.7266/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) YASHOMANGAL PROPERTY CONSULTANT PVT. LTD. ROOPMANGAL 7TH FLOOR G-52 CORNER OF MAIN AVENUE & 16TH ROAD SANTACRUZ (W) MUMBAI -400 054 ASSESSEE VS ITO-WARD 9(3)(4) 255 AAYAKAR BHAVAN 4TH FLOOR MUMBAI -400 020 .... REVENUE PAN: AAACY 0284 F ASSESSEE BY: SHRI SANDEEP GURAV REVENUE BY: SMT. MALTHI R. SRIDHARAN O R D E R THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING TH E IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A)-20 MUMBAI DATED 04.08.2010 FOR T HE A.Y. 2006-07. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. LEARNED ITO ERRED IN DISALLOWING INTEREST OF ` 2 94 252/-. 2. LEARNED ITO ERRED IN HOLDING THAT PROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF INTEREST WAS DISALLOWABLE FOR WANT OF NEXUS OF INCU RRING INTEREST FOR EARNING BROKERAGE. ITA 7266/M/2010 YASHOMANGAL PROPERTY CONSULTANT PVT. LTD. 2 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE AS UNDER. THE ASSESSEE-C OMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF REAL ESTATE BROKERS AND FILED TH E RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL LOSS OF ` 14 983/-. THE RETURN OF THE INCOME WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND AS SESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S.143(3) BY DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOM E AT ` 2 79 269/-. THE A.O. MADE THE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF THE DISALL OWANCE TOWARDS THE INTEREST EXPENDITURE TO THE EXTENT OF ` 2 94 252/-. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE SAID ADDITION BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) . THE LD. CIT (A) DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL EX-PARTE . THE LD. CIT (A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS OFFERED OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD ON VARIOUS DATES I.E. 30.03.2010 19.05.2010 & 11.06.2010. BUT NOTICE WA S SENT THROUGH THE SPEED POST / AD RETURNED UNCLAIMED. THE LD. CIT (A ) THEREFORE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DESIRE TO HEAR IN PERSON AND HE DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL EX PARTE AFTER GOING THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMI TTED THAT THERE WAS CHANGE OF ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE BUT THE SAME WAS REMAINED TO BE INTIMATED TO THE LD. CIT (A). HE FURTHER PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GIVEN ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF APPEARING BEFORE T HE LD. CIT (A). 4. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. D.R. WHO DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECT FOR RESTORING THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A). I THER EFORE ACCEPTING THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESEN T THE CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FILE THE NEW ADDRESS BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) SUO MOTU WELL IN ADVANCE WITHIN TWO WEEKS FROM RECEIPTS OF THIS ORDER. THE LD. CIT (A) IS ALSO DIRECTED TO IS SUE THE NOTICE ON THE NEW ADDRESS IF ANY FILED BY HIM AND ACCORDINGLY AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERIT. IN CASE THE ASSESSEE F AILS TO INTIMATE NEW ITA 7266/M/2010 YASHOMANGAL PROPERTY CONSULTANT PVT. LTD. 3 ADDRESS OR CHANGE IN ADDRESS THE LD. CIT (A) IS AT LIBERTY TO DISPOSE OFF THE MATTER AS HE CONSIDER IT APPROPRIATE. 5. IN THE RESULT ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 1 0TH FEBRUARY 2011. SD/- ( R.S. PADVEKAR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI DATE: 10TH FEBRUARY 2011 COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A) 20 MUMBAI. 4) THE CIT 9 MUMBAI. 5) THE D.R. SMC BENCH MUMBAI. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T. MUMBAI *CHAVAN ITA 7266/M/2010 YASHOMANGAL PROPERTY CONSULTANT PVT. LTD. 4 SR.N. EPISODE OF AN ORDER DATE INITIALS CONCERNED 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 10.02. 2011 SR.PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 10.02.2011 SR.PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/PS 7 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS/PS 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER