SAIFEE HOSPITAL, MUMBAI V. ACIT (TDS )3(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2335/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2323 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 07-04-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K KARDA M

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2335/M/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 2009 ) I.T.A. NO.2337/M/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 2010 ) M/S. SAIFEE HOSPITAL, 15/17, MAHARSHI KARVE ROAD, MUMBAI 400 004. / VS. ACIT, (TDS) - 3(2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 20. ./ PAN :AABTS7800D ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASHWIN KASHINATH / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.K. KARDAM, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 26.10.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26.10.2016 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THERE ARE TWO APPEALS UNDER CONSIDERATION. BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 13, MUMBAI DATED 25.2.2014 FOR THE AYS 2008 - 2009 AND 2009 - 2010. SINCE, THE ISSUES RAISED IN THESE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL, THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THEY ARE CLUBBED, HEARD COMBINEDLY AND DISPOSED OFF IN THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2. SINCE, THE GROUNDS RAISED IN BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL, THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF REFERENCE AND ADJUDICATION PURPOSE THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL ITA NO.2335/M/2014 FOR THE AY 2008 - 2009 ARE EXTRACTED AS UNDER: - 1. THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN NOT DELETING THE ENTIRE DEMAND RAISED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT. 2. THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE AO AND HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT AS ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT IN RESPECT OF THE TAX OF RS. 10,42,829/ - . 3. THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF INTEREST CHARGED BY THE AO U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT. 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE INFORMED THAT AO INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 201(1A) FOR BOTH THE YEAR S UNDER CONSIDERATION. A SSESSEE FILED 2 RECTIFICATION APPLICATION BEFORE THE AO AND THE SAME WAS ALLOWED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE THE ORDERS COMMONLY DATED 29.6.2015. THEREFORE, THE INSTANT APPEALS MAY BE DISMISSED AS ACADEMIC. 4. AFTER HEARING THE LD REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED B EFORE US, WE FIND THAT THE ADJUDICATION OF THE INSTANT APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR BOTH THE YEARS BECOMES ACADEMIC EXERCISE AND THEREFORE, THEY HAVE TO BE DISMISSED AS ACADEMIC. TO THAT EXTENT, GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 TH OCTOBER, 2016. SD/ - SD/ - ( AMARJIT SINGH ) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 26.10.2016 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI