Headstrong Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2555/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7408 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I2
• Next Hearing Date: 20-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RENUKA JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: SHAILESH KUMAR
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH I - 2 , NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 255 5 /DEL/20 1 4 AY: 200 9 - 10 M/S HEAD STRONG SERVICES (INDIA) P.LTD. VS. DY.CIT, CIRCLE 12(1) DELHI INFORMATION PARK NEW DELHI SHASTRI PARK NEW DELHI 110 053 PAN: AABCT 7650 D ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHAILESH KUMAR, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SMT. RENUKA JAIN, CIT, D.R. ORDER PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O. U/S 143( 3 ) R.W.S. 144C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT ) DATED 25.2.2014 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (A.Y.) 2009 - 10. 2 . THE LD.D.R. SOUGHT AN ADJOURNMENT ON THE GROUND THAT THE SR.D.R. IS NOT AVAILABLE. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI SHAILESH KUMAR ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED A RECTIFICATION APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE TRANSF ER PRICING OFFICER (TPO) 1(2), NEW DELHI AND THAT THE T.P.O. VIDE ORDER DT. 10.6.2014 HAS ACCEPTED THIS APPLICATION AND RECTIFIED HIS ORDER. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE A.O. IS NOT GIVING EFFECT TO THIS ORDER PASSED BY THE TPO U/S 154 OF THE ACT DATED 10.6.2014 DESPITE ITA NO. 2555/DEL/2014 A.Y. 2009 - 10 HEADSTRONG SERVICES (INDIA) P.LTD., NEW DELHI 2 CONSTANT FOLLOW - UP FROM THEIR SIDE. HE SUBMITTED THAT IF THE A.O. PASSES CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ORDER OF THE T.P.O. THEN THE APPEAL IN QUESTION WILL NOT SURVIVE. 3. THE LD.CIT, D.R. SMT. RENUKA JAIN REQUESTED FOR TIME TO VERI FY THE MATTER. 4. AFTER HEARING RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THIS IS NOT A FIT CASE FOR GRANT OF ANY FURTHER TIME TO THE REVENUE. HENCE WE DISPOSE THIS APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 5. HEARD SHRI SHAILE SH KUMAR, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 6. THIS AVERMENT IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION THAT, HE SHALL PASS CONSEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT ORDERS TO INCORPORATE THE RECTIFICATION ORDER PASSED B Y THE T.P.O. 1(2) DT. 10. 6.2014 U/S 154 OF THE ACT WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22ND JUNE, 2016. SD/ - SD/ - ( SUCHITRA KAMBLE ) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: THE 22 ND JUNE, 2016 *MANGA ITA NO. 2555/DEL/2014 A.Y. 2009 - 10 HEADSTRONG SERVICES (INDIA) P.LTD., NEW DELHI 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. ASSESSEE ; 2.RESPONDENT; 3.CIT; 4.CIT(A); 5.DR; 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR