COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III V. MUNI SEVA ASHRAM

TAXAP/609/2012

AI Insights

The case involves two tax appeals by the Commissioner of Income Tax against Muni Seva Ashram, challenging orders passed by the ITAT. Tax Appeal No. 661 of 2013 contested an order recalling a previous ITAT decision, while Tax Appeal No. 609 of 2012 challenged the subsequent ITAT judgment. Both appeals were heard together, and the court decided to allow both, quashing the ITAT's orders based on the pending decision of Tax Appeal No. 1231 of 2008, which addressed similar issues. The respondent's counsel did not contest the quashing of the orders but reserved the rights concerning the ongoing Tax Appeal No. 1231 of 2008.

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 728773 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Tax Appeal No.1231 of 2008
• Result in Favour of: Respondent
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: MANISH SHAH
• Assessee Lawyers: K M PARIKH
• Keywords: Appellate Tribunal; Income Tax; Miscellaneous Application; Recall of order

Judgement Text

"O/TAXAP/661/2013 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 661 of 2013 With TAX APPEAL NO. 609 of 2012 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Sd/- and HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI Sd/- ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? NO 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? NO 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? NO 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? NO ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III....Appellant(s) Versus MUNI SEVA ASHRAM....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR KM PARIKH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR MANISH J SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI Date : 24/07/2013 ORAL JUDGMENT Page 1 of 4 O/TAXAP/661/2013 JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1.00. Both these appeals are admitted. Mr.Manish J. Shah, learned advocate, who is on Caveat in Tax Appeal No.609 of 2012, waives the service of notice of admission on both these appeals. 2.00. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, both these appeals are taken up for final hearing today. 3.00. Tax Appeal No.661 of 2013 has been preferred by the appellant – revenue challenging the impugned order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dtd. 12/6/2009 passed in Misc.Application Nos.181 & 199/AHD/2008, by which the learned tribunal has allowed the Misc.Application submitted on 5/9/2008 and consequently recalled the earlier order dtd. 11/7/2008 of the tribunal passed in ITA No.633/Ahd/2008. 4.00. Tax Appeal No.633 of 2013 has been preferred by the revenue challenging the impugned judgement and order dtd. 30/3/2012 passed by the learned appellate tribunal in ITA No.633/Ahd/2008, which has been passed by the appellate tribunal after order dtd. 12/6/2009 passed in Misc.Application Nos.181 & 199/Ahd/2008, by which the appellate tribunal recalled the earlier order dtd. 11/7/2008 passed in the aforesaid ITA No.633/Ahd/2008 and restored the aforesaid appeal to file (which is the subject matter of Tax Appeal No.661 of 2013). 5.00. Considering the fact that against the earlier Page 2 of 4 O/TAXAP/661/2013 JUDGMENT judgement and order dtd. 11/7/2008 passed by the ITAT in ITA No.633/Ahd/2008 (which has been subsequently recalled by the tribunal by passing order dtd. 12/6/2009 passed in Misc.Application No.519 of 2008) (which is the subject matter of Tax Appeal No.661 of 2013), the assessee had already preferred Tax Appeal No.1231 of 2008 which has been admitted by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dtd. 11/5/2009, Mr.J.P. Shah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent – assessee has stated at the bar that the impugned orders passed by the appellate tribunal dtd. 12/6/2009 as well as the subsequent order dtd.30/3/2012 passed in ITA No.633/Ahd/2008, be quashed and set aside and he does not invite further reasoned order, however, has stated that the same shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the assessee in Tax Appeal No.1231 of 2008. 6.00. In view of the above stand taken by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent – assessee recorded hereinabove, more particularly when against the impugned judgement and order dtd. 11/7/2008 passed in ITA No.633/Ahd/2008, which has been recalled subsequently by the ITAT, Tax Appeal No.1231 of 2008, was already admitted on the substantial questions of law framed in the said appeal, impugned orders cannot be sustained. 7.00. In view of the above stand taken by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent – assessee, recorded hereinabove, we are not passing any further reasoned order. 8.00. In view of the above, both these Tax Appeals are Page 3 of 4 O/TAXAP/661/2013 JUDGMENT allowed and the impugned order passed by the ITAT dtd. 12/6/2009 on the Misc.Application submitted by the assessee on 5/9/2008 (which is subject matter of Tax Appeal No.661 of 2013) as well as subsequent order passed by the ITAT dtd. 30/3/2012 passed in ITA No.633/Ahd/2008 (which is subject matter of Tax Appeal No.609 of 2012), are hereby quashed and set aside. However, it is observed that the same shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respective parties in Tax Appeal No.1231 of 2008 and the said Tax Appeal No.1231 of 2008 be decided on merits on the questions which are raised while admitting the aforesaid Tax Appeal No.1231 of 2008. 9. With this, both these Tax Appeals are allowed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- (M.R.SHAH, J.) Sd/- (MS SONIA GOKANI, J.) Rafik Page 4 of 4 "