ACIT, New Delhi V. PEC Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4632/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3770 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 02-06-2010
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 08-12-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANUSHA KHURANA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A NO. 4632/DEL/09 ASSTT. YEAR 2006-07 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VS. PEC LIMITED CIRCLE-14(1), ROOM NO. 415, HANSALAYA, 15 BARAKHAM BA ROAD, C.R. BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SMT. ANUSHA KHURANA, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SANJAY AGGARWAL ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, JM: THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2009 PASSED FOR ASSTT. YEAR 2006-07. TH E LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET POINTED OUT THAT ASSESSEE IS A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING AND IN ORDER TO CHALLEN GE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), DEPARTMENT IS SUPPOSED TO OBTAIN AN APPROVA L FROM THE COMMITTEE ON DISPUTE, AS PROPOUNDED BY THE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE ITA NO. 4632/DEL/2009 ASSTT. YEAR 2006-07 2 OF ONGC VS. CIT REPORTED IN 1995 (SUPPLEMENT) (4 SC C PAGE 541). HE POINTED OUT THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS FAILED TO OBTAI N SUCH APPROVAL AND THUS ITS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN THE PRESENT FORM. LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND WAS UNABLE TO CONTROVERT THE CONTENTION OF LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. SHE POINTED OUT THAT SHE HAS ALREADY WRITTEN TO THE AO FOR PROVIDING THE LATEST STATUS REPORT IN THIS CONNECTI ON. BUT LD. AO FAILED TO RESPOND. SHE SOUGHT FURTHER TIME FOR ASCERTAINING T HE STATUS. 2. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTION AND FIND THAT ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS DATED 30 TH SEPTEMBER 2009, ALREADY 7-8 MONTHS HAVE EXPIRED. THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD HAVE OBTAINED THIS A PPROVAL PRIOR TO FILING UP THIS APPEAL. CONSIDERING THE TIME LAG, WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL WITH A LIBERTY TO THE DEPARTMENT THAT AS AND WHEN I T WILL BE ABLE TO GET SUCH APPROVAL THEN IT CAN GET REVIVE ITS APPEAL TO ORIGINAL NUMBER BY FILING AN APPLICATION. SUBJECT TO ABOVE LIBERTY THI S APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2.6.2010. SD/- [A.K. GARODIA] [RAJPAL YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2.6.2010 VEENA ITA NO. 4632/DEL/2009 ASSTT. YEAR 2006-07 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT