M/s Emulex Communication Private Limited , Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer Ward-11(1), Bangalore

CO 93/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0960 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 16-12-2020
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 06-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IT(TP)ANO.79/BANG/2014 & CO NO.93/BANG/2018 LSI INDIA RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD., BANGALO RE PAGE 2 OF 3 O R D E R PER BENCH: THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE APPEAL AND THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CROSS OBJECTION FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31-12-2013 PASSED BY THE AO IN PURSUANC E OF DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY LD DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL (LD DRP). 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT IT HAS OPTED TO SETTLE THE ISSUES CONTESTED BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ABOVE SAID YEAR UNDER DIRECT TAXES VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020 AND ACCORDINGLY HA S FILED FORM 1 AND 2. THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RECEIVED FORM NO.3. THE LD A.R ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE BAN GALORE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IS DISMISSING THE APPEALS IN SUCH KIND OF CASES GIVING LIBERTY TO SEEK RECALL OF THE ORDER. SHE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT PRESSING THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY IT. 3. THE LD D.R, SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL HAS BEE N FILED BY THE REVENUE AND HENCE, IF THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED AND IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG WITH THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES, THEN THE REVENUE SHOULD BE GIVEN LIBERTY TO FILE APPLICATION SEEKING RECALL OF THE ORDER. THE LD D.R FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO I NTIMATE THE AO ABOUT THE RESULTS OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY IT AN D IF THEY DO NOT GO THROUGH AS DESIRED BY THE ASSESSEE, THEN THE ASSESS EE SHOULD PERSUADE THE AO TO FILE NECESSARY APPLICATIONS SEEK ING RECALL OF THIS ORDER WITHIN THE STATUTORY TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED UN DER THE ACT. 4. WE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. S INCE THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY FILED APPLICATION UNDER VSVS ACT FOR TH E YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO PURPOSE W OULD BE SERVED IN KEEPING THE APPEAL OF REVENUE PENDING, SINCE THE SA ME HAS TO BE