ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI V. SURESH K. JAJOO, MUMBAI

ITA 3687/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 49167 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAMAL MOTA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, J BENCH, MUMBAI. BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A NO.3687/ MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 ACIT, CIRCLE 4(2) .. APPELLANT AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI. VS SURESH K JAJOO, ,. RESPONDEN T 7/10, BOTAWALA BUILDING, 1 ST FLOOR, HORNIMAN CIRCLE, MUMBAI-01. PA NO.AAFPJ 0070 J APPEARANCES: S.K.SINGH, FOR THE APPELLANT KAMAL MOTA, FOR THE RESPONDENT O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CH ALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 23 RD FEBRUARY, 2010, IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECT ION 143(3) R.W.S 263 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN RESPECT OF ASSE SSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 263 OF I.T.ACT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, LD CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT PASSING THE ORDER ON MERITS AS THE DECISION OF IT AT IN QUASHING ORDER U/S.263 HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND A PPEAL U/S.260A HAS BEEN FILED. I.T.A NO.3687/ MUM/2010 SURESH K JAJOO, 2 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LA W, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) IS CONTRARY TO LAW AND CONSEQUENTLY MERITS TO BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 2. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FAIRLY AGREE THAT AS THE R EVISION ORDER UNDER SECTION 263, BY THE VIRTUE OF WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED, ITSELF STANDS QUASHED VIDE ORDER PASSED DATED 21 ST JANUARY, 2010 BY A COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL, THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT CANNOT SURVIVE. THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE APPEAL ARE THUS OF NO CONSEQUENCE, AND MUST BE DISMISSED AS INFR UCTUOUS. WE, ACCORDINGLY, DISMISS THE APPEAL AS INFRUCTUOUS. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARIN G I.E. ON 28 TH JUNE, 2011. SD/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 28 TH JUNE, 2011 PARIDA COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),, MUMBAI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH J, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI