M/S.MANAPPURAM HOTELS P. LTD,THRISSUR vs. THE ACIT, THRISSUR
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWALAssessment Year: 2007-08
PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Thrissur, vide order no. ITA-1/EKM/CIT(A)(A)-V/10-11, dated 18.06.2018 passed against the assessment order by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-9(2), Mumbai, u/s. 144 of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 16.12.2009 for Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. Grounds taken by the assessee are reproduced as under:
A) The Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Thrissur, dated
18.06.2018 in I.T.A. No.1/EKM/CIT(A)-V/10-11, is arbitrary, illegal and without juri iction.
B) It is further respectfully submitted that the impugned Assessment Order u/s 144 dated 16.12.2009, is void and without juri iction, in as much as the Deputy
Commissioner of Income Tax-9(2), Mumbai had no juri iction to pass the 2
Manappuram Hotels P. Ltd., AY – 2007-08
impugned Assessment Order as per the territorial juri iction conferred upon him by relevant notification.
C) Apart from illegality in juri iction, the order is illegal and invalid in law, in as much as the same is passed in gross violation of the statutory provisions and principles of natural justice.
D) It is respectfully submitted that the impugned order is arbitrary and without juri iction and as such, violates the Articles-14, & 19 of the Constitution of India, and hence, the order is to be set aside.
E) Without prejudice, it is respectfully submitted that the order is also arbitrary and invalid, since the same was passed without issuing a pre-assessment notice and without affording reasonable opportunity to the appellant to put forward his case. The order is passed behind the back of the appellant and as such, ab-initio void.
F) It is respectfully submitted that the impugned Appellate Order is also illegal and invalid in as much as the said order confirmed an invalid assessment, to be made use of against the appellant by creating huge and unbearable financial burden.
G) The first Appellate Authority also failed to refer to the proceedings Annexure-
B, wherein the predecessor in office has called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer after having found that such a remand report was relevant and necessary for disposal of the appeal, but the CIT(A) passed the impugned
Appellate Order, by a short cut procedure and straight away dismissed the appeal without reference to any of the facts of the case and without affording reasonable opportunity for hearing and representation. He also failed to refer to the written submissions.
H) The contentions made in Grounds-.C to G are made without prejudice.”
We note that registry has noted a delay of 16 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. In this respect, it is observed that assessee has filed an application for condonation of the said delay along with an affidavit. Upon perusal of the same and hearing both sides, we deem it fit to condone the delay on the ground that there was sufficient cause for the said delay. Accordingly, we condone the delay to take up the matter for adjudication.
This is an appeal which has come up for hearing after its transfer from ITAT, Cochin Bench vide order dated 21.06.2024 by Hon'ble President of ITAT. Contents of the order passed by Hon'ble President,
3
Manappuram Hotels P. Ltd., AY – 2007-08
ITAT accepting the request for transfer of appeal by the assessee from ITAT, Cochin to ITAT, Mumbai are reproduced below:
“Regarding - Request for transfer of Appeal in the case of M/s. Mannapuram Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
This appeal is placed before me in pursuance of order dated 29.02.2024 passed by the Bench at Cochin holding that on the basis of the order passed by the Assessing Officer at Mumbai, the appeal is required to be transferred and heard at ITAT Mumbai Benches.
I have heard Shri Suresh Kumar, learned AR for the assessee as well as Shri S.K. Das, learned DR.
It is not in dispute that the impugned order out of which the present appeal arose is passed by the Assessing Officer at Mumbai. In that view of the matter, the learned DR submitted that the appeal will have to be transferred and heard at ITAT Mumbai Benches. The learned counsel for the assessee did not dispute that the territorial juri iction of the appeal would lie before ITAT Mumbai Benches on the basis of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs ABC Papers Ltd. 447 ITR 1 (SC)).
As per para 8 of Chapter II and para 16H of Chapter III of the office manual although the appeal can be filed before any Bench, the