The ITO, Vapi Ward-2, Valsad V. M/s. Jalaram Developers, Dadra & Nagar Haveli

ITA 2697/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9574 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 03-01-2017
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S D CHHEDA
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA.NO.2697/AHD/2013 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2006-2007 ITO, VAPI WARD - 2 VAPI. VS M/S.JALARAM DEVELOPERS 70, DEEP COMPLEX HAVELI FALIA SILVASSA, D&N.H. PAN : AADFJ 0257 D ! / (APPELLANT) '# ! / (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI K. MADHUSUDAN, SR.DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.D. CHHEDA / DATE OF HEARING : 03/01/2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06/01/2017 $%/ O R D E R REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST OR DER OF LD.CIT(A), VALSAD DATED 27.9.2013 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 20 06-07. 2. SOLITARY GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT LD.CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELEING ADDITION OF RS.37,99,031/- WHICH WAS MADE BY THE AO WITH AID OF SECTION 69B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 30.10.2006. AN ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED UNDE R SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 19.11.2008. INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ASSE SSED AT A LOSS OF RS.29,270/- WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO THE LOSS DECLARE D BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.AO SOUGHT TO REOPEN THE ASSESSMENT BY ISSUANCE O F NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT ON 24.3.2010. THIS NOTICE WAS CHALL ENGED BY THE ASSESSEE IN WRIT PETITION BEING SCA NO.15719 OF 2010 BEFORE THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH ITA NO.2697/AHD/2013 2 COURT. THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT HAS ALLOWED WRIT PETITION VIDE ORDER DATED 9.6.2016 AND QUASHED REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS. 4. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD.REPRESENTATIVES, I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD. IT EMERGES OUT FROM THE RECORD THAT THE LD .AO HAS PASSED REASSESSMENT ORDER ON 10.12.2010. HE HAS MADE AN A DDITION OF RS.37,99,031/-. THIS ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE LD.CIT(A). SINCE REOPENING HAS BEEN QUASHED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COUR T THERE IS FOUNDATION TO PASS RE-ASSESSMENT ORDER. BASIS OF THE RE-ASSESSME NT ORDER HAS BEEN EXTINGUISHED BY VIRTUE OF HONBLE HIGH COURTS ORDE R, ACCORDINGLY, WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERIT OF THIS ADDITION, THIS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. IT IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 6 TH JANUARY, 2017 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 06/01/2017