Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
37723714 RSA 2015
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
3 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
22-09-2015
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
A
Next Hearing Date
16-09-2015
Assessment Year
2012-2013
Appeal Filed On
09-06-2015
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 377 /LKW/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 2 - 1 3 U.P. STATE CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION LTD. (ERSTWHILE : U.P. SAMAJ KALYAN NIRMAN NIGAM LTD.) TC-46/V, VIBHUTI KHAND, GOMTI NAGAR, LUCKNOW V. D CIT, RANGE - IV, LUCKNOW PAN : AAACU 1932 C (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: SHRI S.C. AGARWAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI AMIT NIGA M , D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 16 0 9 201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 22 0 9 2015 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), LUCKNOW-2 INTERALIA ON FOLLOWING GROU NDS: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT (APPEAL) WAS WRONG IN NOT GIVI NG ANY FINDING ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS TAKEN BEFORE HIM: 4. THAT THE INTIMATION UNDER THIS APPEAL IS APPARE NTLY ERRONEOUS AND ARBITRARY AS THERE IS NO INDICATION ABOUT THE ARITH METICAL ERROR OR INCORRECT CLAIM IN THE RETURN. 5. THAT THE AMOUNT OF TAX PAYABLE UNDER SECTION 11 5]AA WAS WRONGLY WORKED OUT AT RS.4,56,79,916/- AGAINST RS.4 ,46,25,405/- AS COMPUTED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. THAT THE TVS CLAIM, RS.2,18,59,483/- WAS WRONGL Y REDUCED TO RS.1,75,46,694/-. 7. THAT THE CLAIM OF REFUND RS.52,47,420/- WAS WRONGLY REFUSED AND THE DEMAND OF RS.26,12,680/- IS NOT IN ACCORDAN CE WITH LAW. :-2-: 2. THAT THE ORDER U/S 143(1) WAS WRONGLY PASSED A GAINST THE ASSESSEE AND IS UNTENABLE IN LAW. 3. THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AUTHORITIES IS AGA INST FACTS AND LAW. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE OF THIS HONBLE TRIBUNAL TO ADD/MODIFY ANY GROUND(S) OF APPEAL DURING THE COURS E OF THE PROCEEDINGS.' 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE HAS MADE A STATEMENT AT THE BAR THAT HE DOES NOT WANT TO PRE SS THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED IN THIS APPEAL. IN THE LIGHT OF ALL T HESE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRESSED THE GR OUNDS OF APPEAL ON ANY OF THE ISSUES, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSE D. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISS ED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTIONED PAGE. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUN TANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 22 ND SEPTEMBER, 2015 AKS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
