AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 720
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted 30/12/2005 by the ld. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle(2)(2), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). 2. At the outset, we would like to state that this appeal is a recalled matter in as much as the ground No.12 raised by the assessee in the original appeal with regard to disallowance made towards provision for warranty of Rs. 23,48,01,000/- while computing book profits u/s.115JB of the Act was not adjudicated by this Tribunal while disposing off the appeal originally vide order dated 21/03/2018. Accordingly, the miscellaneous application was preferred by the assessee before this Tribunal. We find that this Tribunal had disposed off the miscellaneous application in MA No.591/Mum/2018 dated 17/10/2019 by duly recalling the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....asis based on past history of the assessee. The ld. AO did not agree to the contention of the assessee and proceeded to disallow the sum of Rs. 23,48,01,000/- both under normal provisions of the Act as well as under computation of book profits u/s.115JB of the Act. 3.2. We find that as far as disallowance made under normal provisions of the Act, ITAT had set aside to the file of the ld. AO vide page 16 of its order dated 21/03/2018 in para 8.1. We also find that there is absolutely no finding recorded by the ld. CIT(A) in his appellate order as to whether the provision has been made on a scientific basis based on past history of the assessee. Since, the same issue has been set aside to the file of the ld.AO under normal provisions of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The pronouncement may be in any of the following manners :- (a) The Bench may pronounce the order immediately upon the conclusion of the hearing. (b) In case where the order is not pronounced immediately on the conclusion of the hearing, the Bench shall give a date for pronouncement. (c ) In a case where no date of pronouncement is given by the Bench, every endeavour shall be made by the Bench to pronounce the order within 60 days from the date on which the hearing of the case was concluded but, where it is not practicable so to do on the ground of exceptional and extraordinary circumstances of the case, the Bench shall fix a future day for pronouncement of the order, and such date shall not ordinarily (emphasis ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to pronounce the order within a period of 90 days. The question then arises whether the passing of this order, beyond ninety days, was necessitated by any "extraordinary" circumstances. 9. Let us in this light revert to the prevailing situation in the country. On 24th March, 2020, Hon‟ble Prime Minister of India took the bold step of imposing a nationwide lockdown, for 21 days, to prevent the spread of Covid 19 epidemic, and this lockdown was extended from time to time. As a matter of fact, even before this formal nationwide lockdown, the functioning of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai was severely restricted on account of lockdown by the Maharashtra Government, and on account of strict enforcement of heal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....020". It has been an unprecedented situation not only in India but all over the world. Government of India has, vide notification dated 19th February 2020, taken the stand that, the coronavirus "should be considered a case of natural calamity and FMC (i.e. force majeure clause) maybe invoked, wherever considered appropriate, following the due procedure...". The term 'force majeure' has been defined in Black‟s Law Dictionary, as 'an event or effect that can be neither anticipated nor controlled‟ When such is the position, and it is officially so notified by the Government of India and the Covid-19 epidemic has been notified as a disaster under the National Disaster Management Act, 2005, and also in the light of the discussions ab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 lockout was in force is to excluded for the purpose of time limits set out in rule 34(5) of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963. Viewed thus, the exception, to 90-day time-limit for pronouncement of orders, inherent in rule 34(5)(c), with....