ITO WD 29(2)(5), MUMBAI V. PRATIMA PRAMOD NAGRECHA, MUMBAI

ITA 3593/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2717 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 11-06-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJAY
• Section: 143(3); 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) I.T.A. NO. 3593 /MUM/ 20 15 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 8 - 0 9 ) ITO, WARD 29(2)(5) ROOM NO. 206, 2 ND FLOOR PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX BANDRA EAST MUMBAI - 400 051. VS. SMT. PRATIMA PRAMOD NAGRECHA 601, AVDHOOT DARSHAN OFF. NAVGHAR MITHANAGAR CROSS ROAD MULUND WEST MUMBAI - 400 080. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) PAN NO . AADPN7292C ASSESSEE BY SHRI RAHUL HAKANI DEPARTMENT BY SHRI AJAY DATE OF HEARING 12 . 7 . 20 1 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12 . 7 . 201 6 O R D E R THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.3.2014 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) - 40, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO A.Y. 2008 - 09. 2. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LEARNED C IT(A) IN ANNULLING THE ASSESSMENT PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 263 OF THE ACT. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. I NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE RE VISION ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) U/S 263 OF THE ACT . SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE REVISION ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) BY FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND THE TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE THE REVISION ORDER, VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 4. 3.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO. 3647/MUM/2013. 4. WHEN THIS FACTS WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 2 263 OF THE ACT, LEARNED CIT(A) ANNULLED THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R , SINCE THE REVISION ORDER ON THE BASIS ON WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED HAD BEEN SET ASIDE BY THE TRIBUNAL . 5. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) FOR T HE REASONS DISCUSSED AB OVE. ACCORDINGLY, I UPHOLD THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER HAS BE EN PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1 2 .7.2016 SD/ - (B.R.BASKARAN ) ACCOUNTANT ME MBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 1 2 / 7 / 20 1 6 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 PS