IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH: KOLKATA [BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM] I.T.A NOS.2290 & 2291/KOL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. SAURASHTRA FINANCE & HOLDING VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD-9(4), KOLKATA PVT. LTD. (PAN: AAECS1094B) ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) DATE OF HEARING: 10.12.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 10.12.2015 FOR THE APPELLANT: N O N E FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI TANUJ NIYOGI, JCIT, SR. DR BOTH THESE APPEALS BY ASSESSEE ARE ARISING OUT OF S EPARATE ORDERS OF CIT(A)-VIII, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NOS.59 & 49/CIT(A)-VIII/KOL/06-07 DATED 1 1.03.2013 AND 07.01.2013 RESPECTIVELY. ASSESSMENTS WERE FRAMED BY ITO, WARD-9(4), KOLKATA, U/S. 251/143(3)/147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) FO R AYS 2002-03 & 2003-04 VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 24.07.2013. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IN THESE TWO APPEALS OF ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE HAS ONLY GRIEVANCE THAT THE AO HAS NOT ALLOWED THE APPEAL EFFECT TO THE ORDER O F CIT(A) IN BOTH THE YEARS. CAN THIS BE A GROUND FOR CHALLENGE BEFORE ITAT? IN MY OPINION, T HIS CANNOT BE A GROUND FOR CHALLENGE BEFORE ITAT. ACCORDINGLY, THESE TWO APPEALS OF THE ASSESS EE ARE DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. HOWEVER, THE AO IS ADVISED TO GIVE APPEAL EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IMMEDIATELY IN TERM OF VARIOUS INSTRUCTION ISSUED BY CBDT. BOTH THE APPEA LS OF ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 4. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 JD. SR. P.S COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT M/S. SAURASHTRA FINANCE & HOLDING PVT. LTD., 64, SAMBHUNATH PANDIT STREET, KOLKATA-25. 2 RESPONDENT ITO, WARD-9(4), KOLKATA. 3 . THE CIT(A), KOLKATA 4. 5. CIT KOLKATA DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA / TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSTT. REGISTRAR .