M/s. National Housing Bank, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

CO 286/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3475 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 15-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHEFALI SAWROOP
• Assessee Lawyers: ANJU GOEL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, A M AND SH. K. N. CHARY , JM CO NO. 286/DEL/2014 (IN ITA NO. 708/DEL/2014 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2010 - 11 ) NATIONAL HOUSING BANK, C ORE - 5A, INDIA HABITAT CENTRE, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110003 VS A CIT, CIRCLE - 31 (1), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A A B CN2600H ASSESSEE BY : MS. ANJU GOEL, CA REVENUE BY : MS. SHEFALI SAWROOP, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 13 .0 9 .201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 .09 .201 7 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: TH E CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE , ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 708 /DE L /201 4 FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - XXVI, NEW DELHI DATED 19.11.2013. 2 . IN THIS CROSS OBJECTION, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SOUGHT ANY RELIEF AND ONLY NARRATED THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) . 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE INSTANT CASE, IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT NO RELIEF IS SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ONLY SUPPORTED, T HEREFORE, THIS CROSS OBJECTION IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. CO NO . 286 / DEL /201 4 NATIONAL HOUSING BANK 2 4 . ON A SIMILAR ISSUE, THE HON BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT, TAMIL NADU - III VS SUNDARAM CLAYTON LTD. 136 ITR 315 HELD AS UNDER: THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD SUCCEEDED WHOLLY BEFORE THE AAC THERE WAS NO SCOPE FOR FILING AN APPEAL OR CROSS - OBJECTION. A CR OSS - OBJECTION, BEING IN THE NATURE OF AN APPEAL, ALLOWING THE CROSS - OBJECTIONS WOULD MEAN INTERFERING WITH THE ORDER OF THE AAC AND AS THE TRIBUNAL HAD DISMISSED THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL AND UPHELD THE FINDINGS OF THE AAC, IT SHOULD HAVE DISMISSED THE CROSS - OBJECTIONS IN LIMINE AS NOT BEING ENTERTAINABLE. 5 . IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO THE ASSESSEE SUCCEEDED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, SO THERE IS NO SCOPE FOR FILING CROSS OBJECTION WHICH MAINLY SUPPORT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THEREFOR E , THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 19 /0 9 /2017 ) SD/ - SD/ - ( K. N. CHARY ) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DAT ED: 19 /0 9 /2017 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(APPEALS) 5 . DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR