Jamia Urdu, Aligarh V. Addl C.I.T., Range-1, Aligarh

CO 58/AGR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7097 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 24-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 24-04-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 27-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SOHAIL AKHTAR
• Assessee Lawyers: P K SEHGAL

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. 58/AGRA/2011 (IN ITA NO. 369/AGRA/2011) ASSTT. YEAR : 2008-09 JAMIA URDU, VS. ADDL. C.I.T., RANGE-1, MEDICAL ROAD, DODHPUR, ALIGARH. ALIGARH (PAN: AAATJ 5521B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.K. SEHGAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SOHAIL AKHTAR, JR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 24.04.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 24.04.2012 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THE PRESENT CROSS-OBJECTION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E IN RESPECT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN ALLOWING RELIEF TO THE A SSESSEE. 2. SECTION 253(4) OF THE IT ACT PROVIDES FOR FILING OF THE CROSS-OBJECTION BY THE AO OR THE ASSESSEE, AS THE CASE MAY BE, ON R ECEIPT OF THE NOTICE IN THE APPEAL NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THEY MAY NOT HAVE APPEA LED AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDERS AND SUCH CROSS OBJECTION SHALL BE D ISPOSED BY THE TRIBUNAL AS IF IT WERE THE APPEAL PRESENTED WITHIN TIME SPEC IFIED IN THE ACT. FOR FILING C.O. NO.58/AGRA/2011 2 AN APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE OR THE REVENUE SHOULD HAVE GRIEVANCE AGAINST THE ORDER APPEALED AGAINST. THEREFORE, FOR FILING THE C ROSS OBJECTION, IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE IN THE CROSS OBJECTION AS TO WHAT IS HIS GRIEVANCE IN FILING THE CROSS OBJECTION. CROSS OBJE CTION CANNOT BE FILED MERELY IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). H ONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RAMESHCHANDRA AND COMPANY VS. CIT, 168 ITR 375 HELD THAT IF THE ASSESSEE CAN HAVE NO GRIEVANCE, HE CAN FILE NO APPEAL. HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SU NDARAM CLAYTON LTD., 136 ITR 315 HELD HELD, THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD SUCCEEDED WHOLLY BEFORE THE AAC THERE WAS NO SCOPE FOR FILING AN APP EAL OR CROSS-OBJECTION. A CROSS-OBJECTION, BEING IN THE NA TURE OF AN APPEAL, ALLOWING THE CROSS-OBJECTIONS WOULD MEAN IN TERFERING WITH THE ORDER OF THE AAC AND AS THE TRIBUNAL HAD D ISMISSED THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL AND UPHELD THE FINDINGS OF THE AAC, IT SHOULD HAVE DISMISSED THE CROSS-OBJECTIONS IN LIMIN E AS NOT BEING ENTERTAINABLE. THE TRIBUNAL WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TECHNICALLY ALLOWING THE CROSS OBJECTIONS. 2.1 SINCE IN THE PRESENT CROSS-OBJECTION, THE ASSES SEE HAS NOT SHOWN ANY GRIEVANCE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), THEREFOR E, PRESENT CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS INFRUCTUOUS AND IS NOT MAINTAINA BLE IN THE PRESENT FORM. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ACCORDINGLY, SEEK S PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THE CROSS OBJECTION. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE OBSERVATI ONS AND STATEMENT OF THE C.O. NO.58/AGRA/2011 3 LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE CROSS-OBJECTION O F THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESS EE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24.04.2012. 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