Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Aarey Drugs And Pharmaceuticals Ltd, ... vs Dcit Cen Cir 6(1), Mumbai on 28 July, 2017
1
ITA 7443/Mum/2014
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH "B", MUMBAI
Before Shri Mahavir Singh (JUDICIAL MEMBER)
AND
Shri G Manjunatha (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
I.T.A No. 7443/Mum/2014
(Assessment year 2004-05)
Aarey Drugs & vs DCIT, Cir. 6(1),Mumbai
Pharmaceuticals Ltd, 107,
Sahakar Bhavan, 340/48,
Narsi Natha Street, Mumbai-9
PAN : AACA5253A
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Appellant by None
Respondent by Shri Rajat Mittal
Date of hearing 25 -07-2017
Date of pronouncement 28-07-2017
ORDER
Per G Manjunatha, AM :
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of CIT(A)-14, Mumbai dated 12-09-2014, confirming levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2004-05.
2. The brief facts of the case are that in this case return for the assessment year under consideration was filed by the assessee after receipt of notice u/s 148 of the Act. Accordingly assessment was completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) 2 ITA 7443/Mum/2014 on 26-12-2006 determining total income of Rs...44,09,110 after making additions towards difference in cash in hand, administrative expenses and unexplained cash credit. Thereafter the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for concealment of income. In the meantime, assessee preferred appeal before first appellate authority and the CIT(A), for the reasons recorded in his order, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Further on appeal before Tribunal, the Tribunal has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee, wherein the Tribunal deleted addition towards difference in cash balance and confirmed additions made by the AO towards administrative expenses and unexplained cash credit. During the course of penalty proceedings, the assessee neither appeared before the AO nor has furnished any explanation. Therefore, the AO has passed penalty order levying penalty for concealment of particulars of income and accordingly levied penalty at 100% of tax sought to be evaded, which worked out to Rs.13,64,283. Aggrieved by the penalty order, the assssee preferred appeal before CIT(A).
3. Before CIT(A), the assessee neither appeared nor furnished any details. The CIT(A) considering the details available on record upheld penalty levied by the AO and dismissed appeal filed by the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.
3
ITA 7443/Mum/2014
4. None appeared for the assessee. We have heard the Ld.DR and perused the materials available on record. The CIT(A) has passed exparte order in the absence of assessee's presence. The assessee has challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) confirming penalty on the ground that the authorized representative of the assessee did appear on the date of hearing and sought adjournment. The authorized representative was informed that fresh notice would be sent fixing the appointment for a future date. The Ld.CIT(A), without verifying the fact has passed exparte order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We find that the Ld.CIT(A) has posted the case for hearing on various dates. The CIT(A) observed that the assessee neither appeared nor filed any details on the date of hearing. Per contra, assessee claims that its authorized representative appeared on the date of haring and sought adjournment which was granted with instruction to intimate future date of hearing by issuing notice. The facts are not clear. Both the parties are contradicting each other. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate it's case. Therefore, the issue is remitted back to the file of the CIT(A) and direct the CIT(A) to pass fresh order after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 4
ITA 7443/Mum/2014
5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28th July, 2017.
Sd/- sd/-
(Mahavir Singh) (G Manjunatha)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai, Dt : 28th July, 2017
Pk/-
Copy to :
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT(A)
4. CIT
5. DR
/True copy/ By order
Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai