ACIT, Coimbatore V. Magna Electro Castings Limited, Coimbatore

ITA 1632/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 96235 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 01-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P RADHAKRISHNAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI ... , ! ' #, % &' BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1632/MDS/2013 ) *) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE I(1), COIMBATORE 641 018. V. M/S MAGNA ELECTRO CASTINGS LIMITED, 34-A, KAMARAJ ROAD, COIMBATORE 18. PAN : AABCM 4711 E (,-/ APPELLANT) (./,-/ RESPONDENT) ,- 0 1 / APPELLANT BY : SH. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, JCIT ./,- 0 1 / RESPONDENT BY : NONE 2 0 3% / DATE OF HEARING : 01.10.2015 45* 0 3% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.10.2015 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, COIMBAT ORE, DATED 07.05.2013 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2 I.T.A. NO.1632/MDS/13 2. THERE WAS A DELAY OF SIX DAYS IN FILING THIS APP EAL BY THE REVENUE. THE REVENUE HAS FILED A PETITION FOR COND ONATION OF DELAY. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PETITION AND WE FI ND THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFO RE THE STIPULATED TIME. THEREFORE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT TH E APPEAL. 3. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, SH. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, THE LD. D.R., POINTED OUT THAT THE R EVENUE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE VERY SAME ORDER OF THE CIT(AP PEALS) IN I.T.A. NO.1797/MDS/2013. THIS TRIBUNAL, BY AN ORDER DATED 11.02.2015, DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL. THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN I.T.A. NO.1632/MDS/2013 IS A DUPLICATION. THEREFOR E, THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE MAY NOT SURVIVE FOR ADJUDICATION. 4. NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE, INSPITE OF ISSUE OF NOTICE. HOWEVER, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE HA S WRITTEN A LETTER, WHICH IS PLACED ON RECORD, SAYING THAT THE REVENUE HAS FILED APPEAL AGAINST VERY SAME ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS), IN I.T.A. NO.1797/MDS/2013, WHICH WAS DISMISSED BY THIS TRIBU NAL BY ORDER DATED 11.02.2015. THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AGAINST VERY SAME ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) NEED NO T BE ADJUDICATED. 3 I.T.A. NO.1632/MDS/13 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND ALSO THE APPEAL FOLDER IN I.T.A. NO .1797/MDS/2013. IN FACT, THE REVENUE HAD FILED THE APPEAL AGAINST T HE VERY SAME IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) IN I.T.A. NO.179 7/MDS/2013. THIS TRIBUNAL, BY ORDER DATED 11.02.2015, REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE REVENUE. THEREFORE, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IN I.T.A. NO.1632/MDS/2013 IS DUPLICATI ON. THEREFORE, NOTHING SURVIVES FOR ADJUDICATION IN THIS APPEAL. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 9 TH OCTOBER, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' # ) ( ... ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) (N.R.S. GANESAN) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 7 /DATED, THE 9 TH OCTOBER, 2015. KRI. 0 .389 :9*3 /COPY TO: 1. ,- /APPELLANT 2. ./,- /RESPONDENT 3. 2 ;3 () /CIT(A)-I, COIMBATORE 4. 2 ;3 /CIT-I, COIMBATORE 5. 9< .3 /DR 6. ) = /GF.