M/s J.P.Glass Industries, Firozabad V. CIT, Agra

ITA 196/AGR/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7098 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 05-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.196/AGR/2008 ASST. YEAR: 2006-07 M/S. J.P. GLASS INDUSTRIES, VS. COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX-II, MATAWALA BAGH, AGRA. KOTLA ROAD, FIROZABAD. (PAN: AAEFJ 1139 M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT : SHRI P.K. SEHGAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT : SHRI A.K. SHARMA, JR. D.R. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST T HE ORDER DATED 28.03.2008 PASSED BY THE CIT-II ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- 1. BECAUSE, ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX WAS UNJUSTIFIED IN CANCELING ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.04.2007 AS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. BECAUSE, ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAS OMITTED TO T AKE NOTE OF THE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS AVAILABLE ON RECORDS POINTING OUT THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT BE TERMED AS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REV ENUE. 2 3. BECAUSE, ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION BY THE LEARN ED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IS BASED ON INCORRECT UN DERSTANDING OF CORRECT FACTS AND LEGAL POSITION AND DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. 4. BECAUSE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 IS BAD N FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE AFORESAID CASE CAME UP FOR HEARING BEFORE TH E BENCH VARIOUS TIMES, BUT THE SAME WAS ADJOURNED EITHER ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE OR THE LD. D.R. OR FOR THE REASONS MENTIONED IN THE ORDER SHEET. BUT, LASTLY, THE CASE CAME UP FOR HEARING BEFORE THE BENCH ON 05.04.2011 I.E. TODAY. SHRI P. K. SEHGAL, ADVOCATE, COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE APPEARED AND MADE A STATEMENT AT BAR T HAT AS PER HIS ASSESSEES INSTRUCTION, HE IS NOT PRESSING THE PRESENT APPEAL AND REQUESTED THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. HE HAS ALSO ENDORSED TH E SAME ON THE GROUND OF APPEAL. 3. THE LD. D.R. HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION ON THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND KEEPING IN VI EW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, ESPECIALLY THE R EQUEST MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, WE DISMISS THE PRESENT APPEAL. 3 ITA NO.196/AGR/2008 ASST. YEAR: 2006-07 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05.04.2011 ). SD/- SD/- (P.K. BANSAL) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: AGRA DATE: 5 TH APRIL, 2011 PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT BY ORDER 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRI BUNAL, AGRA TRUE COPY