Sahara City Homes-Aligarh, Aligarh V. I.T.O. (AO) Ward-1, Aligarh

CO 3/AGR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8168 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER C.O. NO. 03/AGRA/2012 (IN ITA NO. 429/AGRA/2011) ASSTT. YEAR : 2006-07 SAHARA CITY HOMES-ALIGARH,AOP, VS. INCOME-TAX OFFI CER (AO) (JOINT VENTURE), VILL.-BHUKRAVALI, WARD-1, ALIGAR H. SIKANDARPUR, KHERA, KHUSHKHABAR, PARGANA KOIL, ALIGARH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI WASEEM ARSHAD, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 08.01.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 11.01.2013 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THE PRESENT CROSS-OBJECTION IS FILED BY THE ASSESS EE ON FILING THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IN ITA NO. 429/AGRA/2011. THE C ROSS OBJECTION IS FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), GHAZIABAD DATED 30 .08.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 ON THE GROUND THAT THE CIT(A) IS FULLY JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE INVESTMENT MADE BY THE MEMBERS OF AOP TO THE EXTENT OF RS.1,83,42,020/- AS EXPLAINED INVESTMENT, AS THE SOURCES THEREOF HAVE B EEN EXPLAINED. 2. THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL WAS ALSO FIXED FOR HEARI NG ON 08.01.2013 IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE MADE A REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. THE DE PARTMENTAL APPEAL IS ADJOURNED SEPARATELY. HOWEVER, SINCE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE A SSESSEE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, THEREFORE, NO ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN GRANTED IN THE C ROSS OBJECTION. HONBLE MADRAS C.O. NO.03/AGRA/2012 2 HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT S. SUNDARAM CLAYTON L TD., 136 ITR 315 HAS HELD AS UNDER : HELD, THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD SUCCEEDED WHOLLY BEFORE THE AAC THERE WAS NO SCOPE FOR FILING AN APPEAL OR CROS S-OBJECTION. A CROSS-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 C ROSS-OBJECTIONS IN LIMINE AS NOT BEING ENTERTAINABLE. THE TRIBUNAL WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TECHNICALLY ALLOWING THE CROSS-OBJECTIONS. 3. SINCE THE CROSS-OBJECTION IS MERELY FILED IN SUP PORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION, THEREFORE, CROSS O BJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AS THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE SAID TO BE A GGRIEVED AGAINST THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,83, 42,020/-. THE CROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS, THEREFORE, NOT MAINTAINABLE AND IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. THE ASSESSEE IS, HOWEVER, AT LIBERTY TO SUPPORT THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(A) IN DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE CROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESS EE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY