Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Lovely Fragrance, Mumbai vs Cit 20, Mumbai on 12 July, 2018
ITA No.5772/Mum/2012 Lovely Fragrance Assessment Year-2007-08 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "ए"
ायपीठ मुंबई म ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, MUMBAI ी सी .नाग साद, ाियक सद एवं ी मनोज कुमार अ वाल, ले खा सद के सम ।
BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.5772/Mum/2012 (िनधा रणवष / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Lovely Fragrance Commissioner of Income Tax-20(1) बनाम/ Piramal Chambers, 3 Floor rd A/107, Bakers field Shastri Nagar Andheri(W) Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-400 705 !थायीले खासं ./जीआइआरसं ./P AN/GIR No. AAAFL-1837-E (अ पीलाथ$/Appellant) : ( %थ$ / Respondent) Revenue by : R.P.Meena, Ld. DR Assessee by : Prateek Jain, Ld.AR सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 12/07/2018 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 12/07/2018 Date of Pronouncement आदे श / O R D E R Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [AY] 2007-08 contest the invocation of jurisdiction u/s 263 by Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax-20 [CIT] vide order dated 01/11/2010. The original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on 22/09/2009 accepting the returned loss of Rs.64.73 Lacs. Subsequently, the said order has been subjected to 2 ITA No.5772/Mum/2012 Lovely Fragrance Assessment Year-2007-08 revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 by Ld. CIT for the reasons stated therein. The assessee, by way of this appeal, has challenged the jurisdiction u/s 263.
2. The registry has noted that the appeal has been filed with a delay of 605 days. The Ld. Auhtorized Representative for Assessee [AR], Shri Prateek Jain has pleaded for condonation of the same on the strength of condonation petition dated 13/09/2012 along with affidavit of one of the partner of the assessee firm as well as Chartered Accountant / Tax Consultant of assessee firm namely CA. Shri B.N.Shah & Advocate Shri Naresh Jain. The same has been vehemently opposed by Ld. Departmental Representative [DR], Shri R.P.Meena by pleading that each days delay was required to be explained and there was no sufficient cause demonstrated by the assessee. It has also been brought to the notice of the bench that the in consequential proceedings, the assessee has got relief from first appellate authority which has been confirmed by this Tribunal vide ITA No. 1516/Mum/2014 dated 09/01/2017, a copy of which has been placed on record.
3. Upon perusal of condonation petition & other documents, we find that the assessee received the impugned order on 22/11/2010 and the delay in filing the appeal has been attributed to communication gap between co- coordinating Chartered Accountant Mr. B.N.Shah and representing Chartered Accountant Mr. Naresh Jain, both presuming that other must have filed the appeal. The above reason, in our opinion, reflect the utter negligence and casual approach adopted by the assessee as well as 3 ITA No.5772/Mum/2012 Lovely Fragrance Assessment Year-2007-08 professionals handling the assessee's matter. The plea of communication gap as taken by Ld. AR in condonation petition does not convince us, in any manner, to condone the delay and the same is bereft of any merits. No sufficient cause has been demonstrated before us so as to warrant the condonation of delay. Resultantly, we dismiss the assessee's appeal, being time-barred by law.
4. In nutshell, the appeal stand dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 12th July, 2018 Sd/- Sd/-
(C.N.Prasad) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) ाियक सद / Judicial Member लेखा सद / Accountant Member मंब ु ई Mumbai; दनांक Dated : 12.07.2018 Sr.PS:-Thirumalesh आदे शक त ल पअ े षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ-/ The Appellant
2. 12यथ-/ The Respondent
3. आयकरआय9 ु त (अपील)/ The CIT(A)
4. आयकरआय9 ु त/ CIT- concerned
5. Cवभागीय1GतGनHधमंुबई ,आयकरअपीलKयअHधकरण ,/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. गाडOफाईल /Guard File आदे शानस ु ार/ BY ORDER, उपसहायकपंजीकार/ (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकरअपील.यअ/धकरण ,मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai