S.KISHORE KUMAR, COIMBATORE V. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

ITA 2091/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9360 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRINIRANJANI
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !, # !$ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2091/CHNY/2019 & '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SHRI S. KISHORE KUMAR, D.NO.37/136, SAMY IYER NEW STREET, COIMBATORE 641 001. PAN : ARUPK 0598 G V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, NO.3, GANDHI ROAD, SALEM 636 007. ()*/ APPELLANT) (+,)*/ RESPONDENT) )* - . / APPELLANT BY : MS. S. SRINIRANJANI, ADVOCATE +,)* - . / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT / - 0# / DATE OF HEARING : 27.11.2019 12' - 0# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.01.2020 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -19, CHENN AI, DATED 27.05.2019 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. MS. S. SRINIRANJANI, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY 2 I.T.A. NO.2091/CHNY/19 THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCO ME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') FOR RECTIFICATION. ACCOR DING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED TAX UNDER SEC TION 234A OF THE ACT IN A PROCEEDING UNDER SECTION 154 AND THEREBY E NHANCED THE TAX DEMAND. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE APPE AL FILED AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS STILL PENDING FOR DISPOSAL, THEREFORE, THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT( APPEALS) TO DISPOSE THE PRESENT APPEAL ALSO ALONG WITH THE APPE AL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 3. WE HEARD SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., OR IGINAL APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PE NDING BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) -18 AND THIS APPEAL WAS DISPOSED B Y THE CIT(APPEALS)-19. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH WHY THE APPEAL ARISING OUT OF SECTION 154 PROCEEDING COULD NOT BE DISPOSED OF ALONG WITH MAIN APPEAL? THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THA T THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(APPEALS) SO THAT IT CAN BE HEARD BY ONE OFFICER IN ORDER TO SETTLE THE ISSUE. 3 I.T.A. NO.2091/CHNY/19 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS ON EITHER SID E AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS SAI D TO BE PENDING BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS)-18. THE PRESENT PROCEEDING IS ARISING OUT OF SECTION 154 PROCEEDING. THE APPEAL WAS DISPOSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS)-19. 5. WHEN TWO DIFFERENT PROCEEDINGS ARISE OUT OF THE SAME ASSESSMENT, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPIN ION THAT THE ONE OFFICER HAS TO DISPOSE BOTH THE APPEALS IN ORDER TO AVOID MULTIPLICITY OF PROCEEDINGS AND CONFLICTING JUDICIAL OPINION. W HEN THE ORIGINAL APPEAL WAS PENDING BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS)-18, THE APPEAL ARISING OUT OF SECTION 154 PROCEEDING OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN PO STED BEFORE THE SAME OFFICER SO THAT CONFLICTING JUDICIAL OPINION A ND MULTIPLICITY OF PROCEEDINGS CAN BE AVOIDED. EVEN THOUGH LEVY OF IN TEREST UNDER SECTION 234A OF THE ACT IS MANDATORY, IT WOULD DEPE ND UPON THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE CIT(APPEALS) IN THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THEREFORE, IN ALL FAIRNESS, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE APPEAL ARISING OUT OF THE PROCEEDING INITIATED UNDER SECTION 154 OF TH E ACT HAS ALSO TO 4 I.T.A. NO.2091/CHNY/19 BE HEARD BY THE CIT(APPEALS) ALONG WITH THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEA LS) IS SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS). NECESSARY ADMINISTRATIVE STEPS SHALL BE TAKEN TO POST THE APPEAL BEFORE THE SAME CIT(APPEALS) WHO IS HANDLING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THIS APPEAL AS WELL AS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHALL BE DISPOSED OF BY THE SAME O FFICER IN ORDER TO AVOID MULTIPLICITY OF PROCEEDINGS AND CONFLICTIN G JUDICIAL OPINION. 7. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1 ST JANUARY, 2020 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !) ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 1 ST JANUARY, 2020. KRI. 5 I.T.A. NO.2091/CHNY/19 - +056 76'0 /COPY TO: 1. )*/ APPELLANT 2. +,)*/ RESPONDENT 3. / 80 () /CIT(A)- 19, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT, CENTRAL-2, CHENNAI 5. 69 +0 /DR 6. :& ; /GF.