PRECISE EXPORTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (OSD-II) C-7, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1551/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 October 2017AY 1999-20003 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 confirmed the action of the CIT(A) because the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) or the Tribunal. In the absence of any evidence presented by the assessee, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a private limited company, had its assessment done under section 143(3) for AY 1999-2000, resulting in a total income computation of Rs. 1,44,03,000/-. The assessee disputed the entire demand and the findings of the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's failure to appear and present evidence before the appellate authorities, leading to the confirmation of the lower authorities' orders.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI D.T. GARASIA & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, D.R
Hearing: 07.09.2017Pronounced: 03.10.2017

Per D.T. GARASIA, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.11.2013 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 1999-2000.

2.

The short facts of the case are as under:

2 M/s. Precise Exports Pvt. Ltd. The assessee is a private limited company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956. During the year, assessment was done under section 143(3) computing the total income of a sum of Rs.1,44,03,000/- and tax was demanded at Rs.76,87,601/-. The assessee disputes the whole of the said demand as well as each and every finding recorded by Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO) in his impugned order as wholly arbitrary, against the facts and evidences on record, based on suspicion, surmises and conjectures, unreasonable and or otherwise perverse.

3.

The matter carried to the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the same.

4.

During the course of hearing, the assessee did not remain present before the Ld. CIT(A) and before the Tribunal. In absence of any evidence, we confirm the action of the Ld. CIT(A).

5.

In the result, appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 03.10.2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →