Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
M/S Saini Electronics Security ... vs Acit-26(3), Mumbai on 9 March, 2021
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
"E" BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA no.4873/Mum./2019
(Assessment Year : 2009-10)
M/s. Saini Electronics Security Systems
A-6, Narayan Plaza, Chandivali
................ Appellant
Near HDFC Bank, Sakinaka
Mumbai 400072 PAN - ABAFS0771M
v/s
Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax
................ Respondent
Circle-26(3), Mumbai
Assessee by : None
Revenue by : Shri Vijay Kumar Menon
Date of Hearing - 22.02.2021 Date of Order - 9.03.2021
ORDER
PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.
The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the order dated 30th November 2018, passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-38, Mumbai, confirming penalty ` 86,000, imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") by the Assessing Officer pertaining to the assessment year 2009-10.
2
M/s. Saini Electronics Security Systems
2. When the case was called for hearing, neither the assessee nor any of its authorised representatives appeared before us to represent the case. There is no application for adjournment either. Consequently, we proceed to dispose off the appeal after hearing the learned Departmental Representative and on the basis of material available on record.
2. During the course of hearing, we find that the assessee has filed a letter dated 5th February 2021, before the Registry of the Tribunal seeking adjournment in hearing of the appeal in view of the fact that the assessee has applied for settling the tax dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Tax Scheme, 2020. The letter submitted by the assessee is accompanied by the acknowledgement in Form-1 and 2 of the declaration filed under the aforesaid scheme. The aforesaid letter and the declarations are kept on record.
3. The learned Departmental Representative has expressed no objection to the contents of the letter filed by the assessee.
4. Considering the fact that the assessee has sought adjournment of the present appeal, as it has applied for settling the dispute under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, we are of the opinion that no purpose would be served in keeping the matter alive when the assessee has already approached Revenue authorities for settling the 3 M/s. Saini Electronics Security Systems dispute under VSVS 2020 and thus the assessee's appeal is liable to be dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the assessee to seek restoration of this appeal in the event the application filed under Vivad Se Vishwas Tax Scheme is not accepted by the Department. It is further made clear that in such eventuality if the assessee seeks restoration of the present appeal by filing misc. application, the delay, if any, should be condoned without insisting upon filing any application for condonation of delay.
5. In the result, appeal is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 9.03.2021 Sd/- Sd/-
C.N. PRASAD S. RIFAUR RAHMAN
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
MUMBAI, DATED: 9.03.2021
Copy of the order forwarded to:
(1) The Assessee;
(2) The Revenue;
(3) The CIT(A);
(4) The CIT, Mumbai City concerned;
(5) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai;
(6) Guard file.
True Copy
By Order
Pradeep J. Chowdhury
Sr. Private Secretary
Assistant Registrar
ITAT, Mumbai