Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mittal, Ghaziabad V. Pr.CIT, Ghaziabad

ITA 2664/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5480 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURENDER PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR MALHOTRA
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

ITA NO.- 2664/DEL/2016. RAKESH KUMAR MITTAL. PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: F: NEW DELHI) BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO:- 2664/DEL/2016 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) MR. RAKESH KUMAR MITTAL, KD-25/13, KAVI NAGAR, GHAZIABAD (U.P.). VS. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD. PAN NO: ACOPM9396D APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJESH KUMAR MALHOTRA, ADV. REVENUE BY : SHRI SURENDER PAL, SR. DR ORDER PER: ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS FILED AGAINST THE OR DER OF LEARNED PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD, [LD. PCIT, FOR SHORT] DATED 30.03.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AR E AS UNDER: 1 . ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LD. PRINCIPAL CIT HAS ERRED IN PASSING ORDER U/S 263 OF INCOME TAX ACT. THE ACTION OF PRINCIPAL CIT IS WRONG, ILLEGAL, MISCONCE IVED, UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD AT LAW THEREFORE IT SHOULD BE QUASHED. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LD. PRINCIPAL CIT HAS ERRED IN INITIATING ACTION U/S 26 3 ON THE BASIS OF PROPOSAL MADE BY THE AO, INSTEAD OF RECORDING HIS O WN SATISFACTION ON ITA NO.- 2664/DEL/2016. RAKESH KUMAR MITTAL. PAGE 2 OF 3 THE MATTER. THEREFORE, THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED U /S 263 ARE BAD AT LAW. THEREFORE, THE ACTION OF LD. PRINCIPAL CIT IS WRONG , ILLEGAL, MISCONCEIVED, UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD AT LAW THEREFORE IT SHOULD BE Q UASHED. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW ORDER U/S 263 PASSED BY LD. PRINCIPAL CIT HAD BECOME TIME BAR RED. THEREFORE, THE ACTION OF LD. PRINCIPAL CIT IS WRONG, ILLEGAL, MISC ONCEIVED, UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD AT LAW THEREFORE IT SHOULD BE QUASHED. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE RIGHT TO ADD/ALTER/AMEN D DELETE ALL OR ANY OF GROUND APPEALS BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING. (2) AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE INFORMED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT WISH TO PRESS THIS APPEAL; AND THA T THE ASSESSEE WISHED TO WITHDRAW THIS APPEAL. A WRITTEN PETITION DATED 30.01.2019 W AS ALSO FILED BY LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, SEEKING TO WITHDR AW THE APPEAL. THE LD. SR. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR, FOR SHORT) DID N OT OBJECT TO WITHDRAWAL OF THE APPEAL BY ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS DIS MISSED AS WITHDRAWN AND NOT PRESSED. (3) IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019. SD/- SD/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 05.02.2019 POOJA/- COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT ITA NO.- 2664/DEL/2016. RAKESH KUMAR MITTAL. PAGE 3 OF 3 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION 04/02/19 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 04/02/19 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER