TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 750X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted by the assessee . - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - I.T.A. No.623/Mum/2016 - - - Dated:- 9-5-2018 - SHRI C.N PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri Satish Mody For The Revenue : Shri Rajat Mittal (DR) ORDER PER RAMIT KOCHAR, Accountant Member This appeal, filed by the assessee, being ITA No. 623/Mum/2016, is directed against appellate order dated 18. 05. 2015 passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Vadodra (hereinafter called the CIT(A) ), for assessment year 2004-05, the appellate proceedings had arisen before learned CIT(A) from penalty order dated 21. 03. 2014 passed by learned Assessing Officer (hereinafter called the AO ) u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act ) for AY 2004-05. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the memo of appeal filed with the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (hereinafter called the tribunal ) read as under:- 1. To quash the penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of ₹ 3, 20, 000/- passed by the Assessing officer. 3. The brief facts of the case are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T(A). The assessee explained that its factory is locked and bank accounts are frozen. The expenses related to the assessee are paid by Directors which are booked in the assessee s books of accounts and credited to unsecured loans received from Directors in assessee s books of accounts. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the assessee appeal as apart from confirmation from lenders no other details such as bank statements of Directors and other payments particulars were furnished by the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by appellate order dated 18-05-2015 passed by the learned CIT(A), the assessee has come in an appeal before the tribunal . At the outset on being asked by the Bench that the Ld. CIT(A) as well as AO who passed the penalty orders are situated in the State of Gujarat and as to how the second appeal in this case is filed by the assessee with ITAT, Mumbai . The Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that vide order dated 11. 08. 2015 bearing No. BRD/Pr. CIT. V. 1/HQ/179-Juris/COIL/2015-16 u/s 127(1) read with Section 127(2) of the 1961 Act, the jurisdiction of the assessee stood transferred from DCIT, Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara to Income-tax Officer, Ward-1(1)-2, Mumbai by Pr. CIT, Vadodara- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... odara 4. The Addl. CIT, Range-1(1), Mumbai 5. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara - The case records may be transferred immediately. 6. The ITO, Ward-1(1)-2, Mumbai. 7. The assessee. Sd/- ( ANJESH KUMAR) ITO (HQ) For Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Vadodara -1, Vadodara There is also a delay of 176 days wherein the appeal is filed late with the tribunal by 176 days beyond the time stipulated u/s. 253(3) of the Act. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee explained that the factory of the assessee was situated near Vadodara, Gujarat which is lying closed and is under possession of GIIC u/s. 29 of the SFC Act, 1951 since 2004 and there is no operation or staff at Vadodara. It was submitted that the assessee has office in Mumbai while assessments were done at Vadodara, Gujarat which was too inconvenient and cumbersome for the assessee as the assessee did not have any staff in Gujarat apart from being too expensive for the assessee. The assessee requested for transfer of jurisdiction to Mumbai and after lot of follow up the same was transferred by Revenue to Mumbai vide orders dated 11. 08. 2015. It was submitted that the assessee is f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vadodra was lying closed and was taken over by GIIC u/s 29 of the SFC Act, 1951 since 2004. It was submitted that bank accounts were frozen and hence Directors were incurring expenses for the sustenance of the assessee company from their personal bank accounts. . The payments for all these expenses were met out of personal bank accounts of the Directors of the assessee company which was brought into books of accounts of the assessee company as unsecured loans from Directors as these expenses pertained to the assessee company. The confirmation from the Directors who have advanced money to the assessee by meeting expenses of the assessee to the tune of ₹ 8, 86, 454/- along with their PAN numbers were submitted before the authorities below and it was prayed that the penalty levied be deleted. The said confirmations are filed with tribunal which are placed in file. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee on being asked by the Bench after taking instructions from the assessee s Managing Director who was also present in the Court Room stated that since the documents were seized by GIIC along with taking over of factory premises in the year 2004, hence the same could not be produced before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
