9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 323X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lockdown - HELD THAT:- Taking note of the extraordinary situation in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown, the period of lockdown days need to be excluded. See case of DCIT vs. JSW Limited [ 2020 (5) TMI 359 - ITAT MUMBAI ] - Shri Vikas Awasthy, Judicial Member And Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Ms. R.Kavitha ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Mumbai (in short the CIT (A) ) dated 18/05/2018 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The brief facts of the case as emanating from the records are: The assessee is engaged in the business of trading in ferrous and non-ferrous metals. On the bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tance of ld. DR and the material available on record. 4. Ms. R. Kavitha, representing the Department vehemently supported the impugned order. The ld.Departmental Representative submitted that the Assessing Officer has estimated GP on bogus purchases in line with the judgement of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451(Guj). The ld. DR contended that the order of Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) are justified and reasonable. On merits the ld. DR submitted that the assessee has failed to substantiate genuineness of the purchases and suppliers. The assessee could neither produce the dealers from whom alleged goods were purchased, nor the assessee could produce vital documents such as delivery chall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITAT Rules, 1963), the order was required to be ordinarily pronounced within a period of 90 days from the date of conclusion of the hearing of appeal. The instant appeal was heard prior to the lockdown declared by the Hon ble Prime Minister on 24-03-2020 in view of COVID-19 pandemic. The lockdown was forced due to extra ordinary circumstances caused by world wide spread of COVID-19. Thereafter, the lockdown was extended from time to time. Therefore, the pronouncement of order beyond the period of 90 days from the date of hearing is not under ordinary circumstances. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. JSW Ltd., ITA No.6264/Mum/2018 for A.Y 2013-14 decided on 14/05/2020, under identical circumstances, after consideri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... April 2020, held that directed while calculating the time for disposal of matters made timebound by this Court, the period for which the order dated 26th March 2020 continues to operate shall be added and time shall stand extended accordingly . The extraordinary steps taken suo motu by Hon ble jurisdictional High Court and Hon ble Supreme Court also indicate that this period of lockdown cannot be treated as an ordinary period during which the normal time limits are to remain in force. In our considered view, even without the words ordinarily , in the light of the above analysis of the legal position, the period during which ITA No. 6103 and lockout was in force is to excluded for the purpose of time limits set out in rule 34(5) of the Appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
