PUTTARAJU P. GOWDA, MUMBAI V. DCIT 22(2), NAVI MUMBAI

ITA 4594/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1634 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 04-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MAHUA SARKARDR
• Assessee Lawyers: VALLABHDAS D PARMAR
• Section: 54F

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, C MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4594/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 PUTTARAJU P. GOWDA, 105, VAINKUNTH CO-OPERATIVE HSG. SOCIETY, SINDHI-SOCIETY, 3 RD STAGE, GOKULDHAM, CHEMBUR, MUMBAI-400071 / VS. DCIT-22(2), 3 RD FLOOR, INCOME TAX OFFICE, TOWER NO.6, INTL INFOTECH PARK ABOVE VASHI RAILWAY STATION, VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI-400703 ( ! ' /ASSESSEE) ( # / REVENUE) PAN. NO. AAEPG9637M #$ % ' & / DATE OF HEARING : 28/11/2016 % ' & / DATE OF ORDER: 02/12/2016 ! ' ! / ASSESSEE BY SHRI VALLABH DAS D. PARMAR # ! / REVENUE BY MS. MAHUA SARKAR-DR ITA NO. 4594/MUM/2014 PUTTARAJU P. GOWDA 2 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DAT ED 23/08/2011 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI. THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE SERVICE OF MANDATOR Y NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER THE ACT) WITHIN PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT APPLICABLE FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR IN QUESTION AND RESTRICTING THE RELIEF U/S 54F TO THE EXTENT OF LTCG OF RS.76,10,544/- AND NOT ALLOWING T HE FULL RELIEF. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED D.R., MS. MAHUA SARKAR, ASSERTED THAT T HE IMPUGNED ISSUE IS COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY T HE DECISION FROM HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HUMAYUN SULEMAN MERCHANT VS CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (ITA NO.545 OF 2002) ORD ER DATED 18/08/2016. THIS ASSERTION OF LD. DR WAS NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. I N VIEW OF THIS FACTUAL MATRIX, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE, SHRI VALLABH DAS D. PARMAR, REQUESTED THE BENCH TO GRANT PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE. THE LD. DR HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUE ST OF THE ASSESSEE. 2.1. CONSIDERING THE REQUEST OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, PERMISSION IS GRANTED TO THE ITA NO. 4594/MUM/2014 PUTTARAJU P. GOWDA 3 ASSESSEE TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL, THEREFORE, THE APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 28/11/2016. SD/- SD/- ( RAJESH KUMAR ) (JOGINDER SINGH) '!# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $!# /JUDICIAL MEMBER $ MUMBAI; ( DATED : 02/12/2016 F{X~{T? P.S / /. .. %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *+,- / THE APPELLANT (RESPECTIVE ASSESSEE) 2. ./,- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 0 0 1' ( *+ ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. 0 0 1' / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI, 5. 3#4 .' , 0 *+& * 5 , $ / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 6 7$ / GUARD FILE. ! / BY ORDER, /3+' .' //TRUE COPY// /! (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , $ / ITAT, MUMBAI