DCIT, Ludhiana V. M/s Cremica Agro Fodds Ltd., Ludhiana

ITA 1275/CHANDI/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5288 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 26-07-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 10-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBHASH AGGARWAL
• Section: 143(3); 263; 63

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,B BENCH, CHA NDIGARH BEFORE SHRI D K SRIVASTAVA, AM AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWL A, JM ITA NO. 1275/CHD/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 DCIT, CIRCLE-III, V CREMICA AGRO FOODS LTD., LUDHIANA. G.T.ROAD (WEST), LUDHIANA. PAN: AADFK-3348J APPELLANT BY: SHRI N.K.SAINI RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SUBHASH AGGARWAL ORDER D K SRIVASTAVA: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 13.08.201 0 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FAC TS IN QUASHING THE ORDER OF AO BY NOT DECIDING THE CASE O N MERITS WHILE ONLY RELYING ON THE QUASHING OF CITS ORDER PASSED U/S 263 BY HON'BLE ITAT. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE AO HAS PASS ED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 01.12.2009 U/S 143(3) READ W ITH SECTION 263 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT PURSUANT TO THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT U/S 263 ON 22.08.2008 BY WHICH THE LD. CIT(A) HAD RESTO RED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR PASSING FRESH ASSESSMENT ORD ER IN THE LIGHT OF THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY HIM. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT TH E ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT U/S 263 WAS CHALLENGED BEFORE THIS TRIBU NAL AND THIS TRIBUNAL HAS BY ITS ORDER DATED 30.04.2010 QUASHED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER ON 22.08.2008 AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, WHICH IS NOW SUBJECT MATTER OF APPEAL, SHOUL D ALSO BE QUASHED AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED TO GIVE EFF ECT TO THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) U/S 263 ON 22.08.2008. THE CA SE OF THE DEPARTMENT, HOWEVER, IS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY TH IS TRIBUNAL QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER U /S 263 IS SUBJECT MATTER OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE HIGH COURT. THE FA CT, HOWEVER, ITA 99/CHD/2011 PRAGATI HI-TECH PRODUCTS P.LTD. 2 REMAINS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL ON 3 0.04.2010 QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER U/S 2 63 ON 22.08.2008 HAS NOT BEEN STAYED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT. IT IS, THEREFORE, NOT OPEN TO US TO TAKE A VIEW CONTRARY T O THE ORDER ALREADY PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL ON 30.04.2010. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IS CONFIRMED. 4. APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 29 TH JULY 2011. SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (D K SRIV ASTAVA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 29 TH JULY 2011 POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT, 2. THE RESPONDENT, 3. THE CIT(A), 4. THE CIT 5. THE D.R, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, CHANDIGARH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH