ACIT, Noida V. M/s. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority, Noida

ITA 2211/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2998 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 31-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 11-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJ RANI LAKRA; PRIYHANKA GARG
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Time period of passing order

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCHES: E NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI I. C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T. APPEAL NO. 2211/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER M/S.NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL OF INCOME TAX, VS. DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, CIRCLE : 1, NOIDA. SECTOR : 6, NOIDA 201 301. PAN : AAALN 0120 A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : MS. RAJ RANI LAKRA, C. A.; & MS. PRIYHANKA GARG, C.A. DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI H.K. CHOUDHARY, CIT [DR]; DATE OF HEARING : 31.05.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.05.2017 O R D E R PER I. C. SUDHIR, J.M. : THE APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER, HOLDING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS NULL AND VOID AS TIME BARRED. 2 2. CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153(1) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS TO BE PASSED BY 31.03.2006. UNDISPUTEDLY, THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE STAYED BY THE HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN WRIT PETITION (WRIT TAX NO.1338 OF 2005 PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE) AND THE STAY REMAINED IN OPERATION FROM 29.09.2005 TO 28.02.2011, THUS, THERE IS AGAIN NO DISPUTE THAT THE PERIOD OF STAY OF 5 YEARS AND 5 MONTHS WILL HAVE TO BE EXCLUDED FROM NORMAL LIMITATION PERIOD AND ACCORDINGLY THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PASSED BY 31.08.2011. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS, HOWEVER, PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON 9.12.2011, WHICH IS ALMOST 3 MONTHS BEYOND THE LIMITATION PERIOD AS PRESCRIBED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153(1) OF THE ACT. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS THUS, RIGHTLY HELD THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN QUESTION WAS BARRED BY TIME LIMIT AS PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 153(1) OF THE ACT. THE SAME IS UPHELD. THE GROUNDS ARE ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. 3 3. IN RESULT, APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 4. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON : 31.05.2017 . SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI ) ( I. C. SUDHIR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : THE 31 ST MAY, 2017 . *MEHTA* 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT; 2. RESPONDENT; 3. CIT; 4. CIT (APPEALS); 5. DR, ITAT, ND. BY ORDER. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 5 DATE DRAFT DICTATED ON 31.05.2017 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 31.05.2017 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.