M/S JAYBHARAT TEXTILES AND REAL ESTATE LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 5(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1090/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 January 2022AY 2011-125 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal because it was not filed by the Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP) himself, nor was there proper authorization. Section 14 of the IBC code was also deemed not applicable as the appeal was filed by the assessee, not against it.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the addition of Rs. 4,21,21,760/- and reopening of assessment was dismissed by the CIT(A). The assessee company was undergoing insolvency proceedings, and an authorized representative filed the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal was maintainable when filed by an authorized representative instead of the IRP, and whether the moratorium under IBC applied to an appeal filed by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 69,Section 13,Section 14

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

Hearing: 29.12.2021Pronounced: 06.01.2022

आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण “F” न्यायऩीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI KULDIP SINGH, JM AND SRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM आयकर अऩीऱ सुं./ (ननधधायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2011-12) M/s Jaybharat Textiles and The Dy. Commissioner of Real Estaet Ltd. Income Tax, 11/12, Raghuvanshi Mill Central Circle 5(3), R.NO. 1906, 19th Floor, Compound, बनाम/ Senapati Bapat Marg, Air India Building, Vs. Lower Parel (W), Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 013 Mumbai-400 021 (अऩीऱाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) स्थायी ऱेखा सुं./PAN No. AAACJ5959L अऩीरधथी की ओय से / Appellant by : None प्रत्मथी की ओय से / Respondent by : Shri Pinisetty Satya Prasanth, DR सुनवधई की तधयीख / Date of hearing: 29.12.2021 घोर्णध की तधयीख / Date of pronouncement : 06.01.2022 आदेश / O R D E R

प्रशाुंत महर्षि, ऱेखा सदस्य के द्वारा / PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by assessee against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] on 26.11.2019. By this order the appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed under section 144 read with section 147 of the Income- Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred as ‘Act’) on 18.12.2018

2.

Briefly stated fact of the case shows that assessee is a company, who filed its returned of income for AY 2011-12 on 27.09.2011 which was assessed under section 143(3) of the Act. Subsequently, information was received that some other party has provided accommodation entries to the assessee. The provider of the accommodation entry did not have any credentials for providing of such entry and thereafter, after recording the reasons notice under section 148 was issued on 27.03.2018. On 03.10.2018, after repeated notices assessee filed its return of income in response to reopening of the assessment. Assessee was provided copy of the reasons recorded and thereafter notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued. The assessee was asked to explain the credibility of the accommodation entry which assessee failed to explain before the Assessing Officer and thereafter the Assessing Officer passed an order under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act and made an addition of Rs.4,21,21,760/-.

4.

Assessee aggrieved with that order preferred the appeal before the learned CIT(A) challenging the reopening of the assessment as well as the addition on merits. The learned CIT(A) confirmed both the issues and therefore assessee is in appeal before us.

5.

At the time of hearing a letter dated 27.12.2021, it was informed that NCLT Ahmedabad has passed an order in the above assessee company appointing Mr. Naren Sheth as Insolvency Resolution Professional and the Insolvency proceedings are still going on. Therefore, it was submitted that Section 13 and 14 of the IBC code are applicable and therefore, in view of the moratorium the matter may be adjourned.

6.

The learned Departmental Representative submitted that Section 13 and 14 of the IBC code is with respect to continuation of proceedings against company however, in the present case the assessee is an appellant.

7.

We have carefully considered the rival contention and find that this appeal is filed by assessee which is verified by

8.

Even otherwise, this appeal is filed by assessee and not against assessee, therefore provision of section 14 IBC 2016 does not apply.

9.

In view of this, we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee with a liberty to the assessee to file an appeal in proper format and duly verified by the person authorized to file the return of income along with an application for recall of this order.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →