RAKESH JABARMAL JAIN, MUMBAI v. ITO-19(3)(1) (Present A.O.) , ITO-15(2)(2) (Present A.O.), MUMBAI

ITA 88/MUM/2021 | 2009-10
Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2021 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 8819914 RSA 2021
Assessee PAN ACWPJ1412F
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 88/MUM/2021
Duration Of Justice 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
Respondent ITO-19(3)(1) (Present A.O.) , ITO-15(2)(2) (Present A.O.), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 04-11-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Assessment Year 2009-10
Appeal Filed On 01-02-2021
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH VICE PRESIDENT ITA NO. 88/MUM/2021 : A.Y : 2009-10 Rakesh Jabarmal Jain C/o. D.C. Bothra & Co. LLP (CA) (Formerly known as D.C. Bothra & Co.) 297 Tardeo Road Wille Mansion 1 st floor Opp. Bank of India Nana Chowk Mumbai 400 004. PAN : ACWPJ1412F (Appellant) Vs. Income Tax Officer – 19(3)(1) Mumbai. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Rajkumar Singh Respondent by : Shri Vaibhav Jain Date of Hearing : 28/10/2021 Date of Pronouncement : 05/11/2021 O R D E R This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30 Mumbai (in short ‘CIT(A)’) in Appeal No. CIT(A)-30/ 19(3)(1)/10390/2019-20 dated 25.11.2019. The assessment was framed by Income Tax Officer – 15(2)(2) Mumbai for Assessment Year 2009-10 vide his order dated 26.12.2011 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. At the outset the learned counsel for the assessee drew my attention to the order of CIT(A) and the relevant order of CIT(A) reads as under :- 2 ITA No. 88/Mum/2021 Rakesh Jabarmal Jain “This appeal was reflected in the pendency of CIT(A) – 30 in ITBA as appeal No. 10390/19-20 for A.Y. 2009-10. 2. Notices were issued on ITBA on 18.10.2019 and 14.11.2019 to afford opportunity of hearing to the appellant. There was no compliance by appellant. 3. No grounds of appeal are available. The appeal is dismissed as the same cannot be adjudicated without Grounds of Appeal and also for non- prosecution of appeal. 4. In the result for statistical purposes appeal filed for A.Y. 2009-10 is treated as Dismissed.” When this was confronted to the learned Sr. DR he could not argue anything. He only requested that the matter can be restored back to the file of the CIT(A). 3. After hearing both the sides I set aside the order of CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication. Needless to say in case the CIT(A) has no grounds of appeal assessee has to file the grounds. However the grounds are before the Tribunal i.e. in Form no. 35. Hence the order of CIT(A) is set aside and the matter remanded back to his file for fresh adjudication. 4. In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 5 th November 2021. Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT Mumbai Date : 5 th November 2021 *SSL* 3 ITA No. 88/Mum/2021 Rakesh Jabarmal Jain Copy to :. 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT(A) concerned 4) The CIT concerned 5) The D.R “SMC” Bench Mumbai 6) Guard file By Order Dy./Asstt. Registrar/Sr. PS I.T.A.T Mumbai