, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUMBAI . . , , , BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER / I .T.A. NO . 2443 & 2444/MUM/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2003 - 04 & 2004 - 05 M/S. SONATA SOFTWARE LTD., 207 - 208, T.V. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, S.K. AHIRE MARGE, WORLI, MUMBAI - 400 030 / VS. THE ACIT, RANGE - 7(2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 400 020 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AABCS 8459D ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: SHRI VIJAY MEHTA / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NAVEEN GUPTA / DATE OF HEARING : 15 . 0 7 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 .0 7 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: T H ESE ARE APPEAL S BY THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDER S OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 13 , MUMBAI DT. 10.1.2013 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR S 200 3 - 0 4 & 2004 - 05 . 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN BOTH THESE YEARS IS THE SAME AND WHICH AND WHICH READ S AS UNDER: ITA. NO S . 2443 & 2444/M/2013 2 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE HONBLE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE STAND OF THE LD. AO IN REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 147 OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT U/S. 147 OF THE ACT MAY BE DECLA RED AS BAD IN LAW AND REASSESSMENT ORDER MAY PLEASE BE CANCELLED. 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AT PARA - 2.3. OF HIS ORDER HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF HIS PREDECESSOR GIVEN FOR THE APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2005 - 06. IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NOS. 8032/M/2011 AND 7739/M/2011 HAS QUASHE D THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE LD. COUNSEL PLACED THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL BEFORE US. 3. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT BRING ANY DISTINGUISHING DECISION IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND THE RELEVANT DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE (SUPRA). WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE REASONS FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN ITA NO. 8032/M/2011 FOR A.Y. 2005 - 06, TH E FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL IS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND OF APPEAL FOR THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND THE JUDICIAL DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE IN A.Y. 2005 - 06, THE TRIBUNAL HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMB AY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD. VS DCIT325 ITR 102 AND FOLLOWING THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD., THE TRIBUNAL HAS QUASHED THE INITIATION AND REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. ITA. NO S . 2443 & 2444/M/2013 3 4.1. AS MENTIONED ELSEWHERE, THE LD. CIT(A ) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF HIS PREDECESSOR FOR A.Y. 2005 - 06 AND MENTIONED HEREINABOVE, THE SAID ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) HAS BEEN REVERSED BY THE TRIBUNAL . RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH, WE QUASH THE REASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS FOR BOTH THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. OR DER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15TH JU LY , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( A.D. JAIN ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 15 TH JU LY , 2015 . . ./ RJ , 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 . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI