IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'G' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3901/MUM/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) M/S. GOLCHA CINETALC P. LTD. 6TH FLOOR, 84 RAJMAHAL VEER NARIMAN ROAD, CHURCHGATE MUMBAI 400020 VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1(1)(4) ROOM NO. 531A, 5TH FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD MUMBAI 400020 PAN AAACG1817G APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI SUNIL HIRAWAT RESPONDENT BY: MS. N. HEMALATHA DATE OF HEARING: 25.06.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25.06.2018 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, AM THIS APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 28.02.2017 PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-2, MUMBAI AND IT RE LATES TO A.Y. 2010-11. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. T HE ISSUE CONTESTED BEFORE US RELATES TO THE DEDUCTION CLAIME D BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80IB(7A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT (HEREINAFTER THE ACT). 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THA T THE ISSUE RELATING TO DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80IB(7A) OF THE ACT CAME BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEA RS 2006-07 TO 2008-09 AND THE TRIBUNAL HAS RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FIL E OF THE AO FOR EXAMINING THE CLAIM AFRESH. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE A O HAS ALREADY PASSED ORDERS IN THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS REJECTING THE C LAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN ALL THE YEARS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEALS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) CHALLENGING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO IN THE ABOVE SAID YEARS AND THEY ARE PENDING BEFORE LD CIT(A). ACCORD INGLY HE SUBMITTED THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL MAY BE KEPT PENDING FOR SOME TIM E. ITA NO. 3901/MUM/2017 M/S. GOLCHA CINETALC P. LTD. 2 4. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LEARNED D.R. SUBMITTED THAT T HE TRIBUNAL HAS ALREADY TAKEN A VIEW ON THE VERY SAME ISSUE IN ASSE SSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 TO 2008-09 AND THE PRESENT APPEAL MAY BE DECIDED BY FOLLOWING THE SAID ORDER. 5. IN THE REJOINDER THE LEARNED A.R. SUBMITTED THAT TH E TRIBUNAL HAS RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO IN THE EA RLIER YEARS AND THE AO HAS ALREADY DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. ACC ORDINGLY HE SUBMITTED THAT NO PURPOSE WILL BE SERVED IN RESTORING THE MAT TER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO, WHO HAS ALREADY TAKEN A VIEW ON THIS ISSUE. 6. AT THIS STAGE, THE BENCH SUGGESTED THAT THIS APPEAL MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), SINCE IDENTICAL ISSUE DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IN EARLIER YEARS ARE PENDING BEFORE HIM. B OTH THE PARTIES AGREED TO THE SAME. ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE RELATING TO DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 8 0IB(7A) OF THE ACT AND RESTORE THE SAME TO HIS FILE SO THAT HE CAN DISPOSE OF ALL THE APPEALS TOGETHER. SINCE IDENTICAL ISSUES ARE URGED IN THESE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT A TIME LIMIT MAY BE PRESCRI BED FOR DISPOSING OF THESE APPEALS. ACCORDINGLY WE DIRECT THE LEARNED CI T(A) TO DISPOSE OF ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WITHIN A PERIOD OF THREE MO NTHS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTE D TO FULLY COOPERATE WITH THE LEARNED CIT(A) WITHOUT SEEKING ADJOURNMENT EXCE PT ON ACCOUNT OF REASONABLE CAUSE. IF THE ASSESSEE SEEKS ADJOURNMENT , THE PERIOD OF DELAY CAUSED BY THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE ADDED TO THE ABOVE SAID PERIOD OF THREE MONTHS. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH JUNE, 2018. SD/ - SD/ - (AMARJIT SINGH) (B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 25 TH JUNE, 2018 ITA NO. 3901/MUM/2017 M/S. GOLCHA CINETALC P. LTD. 3 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) -2, MUMBAI 4. THE CIT - 1, MUMBAI 5. THE DR, G BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.