DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI V. DENA BANK, MUMBAI

ITA 5434/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3337 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: ANANTAN
• Section: 143(3); 115JB; 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 5434/M/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 - 200 8 ) DCIT - 2(3), R.NO.552, 5 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 20. / VS. DENA BANK, DENA BANK BUILDING, 2 ND FLOOR, 17 - B, HORNIMAN CIRCLE, FORT, MUMBAI - 23. ./ PAN : AAACD4249B ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.K. SRIVASTAVA, CIT / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANANTAN / DATE OF HEARING : 16.03.2016 / DATE O F PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.03.2016 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ON 27.8.2014 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 6, MUMBAI DATED 13.5.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 2008. IN THIS APPEAL, REVENUE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS WHICH READ AS UNDER: - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT (A) ERRED IN ANNULLING THE RELEVANT ORDER WHEN THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT AGAINST THE SET - ASIDE ORDER OF THE ITAT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW , THE LD CIT (A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE PROVISION OF SECTION 115JB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WERE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE BANK RELYING ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF UNION BANK OF INDIA IN 49 SOT 32 (MUM) 2011 WHICH HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND APPEAL ON THIS ISSUE IN THE CASE HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY VIDE ITA NO.546 OF 2012. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BRIEFLY NARRATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND BRINGING OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.3675/M/2012 (AY 2007 - 08), DATED 5.2.2014 , HE MENTIONED THAT VIDE PARA 15 OF THE SAID ORDER, THE TRIBUNAL QUASHED THE REVISION ORDER DATED 29.3.2012 OF THE CIT MADE U/S 263 OF THE ACT . THEREFORE, C ONSIDERING THE SAID TRIBUNALS O RDER (SUPRA), THE FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER MADE U/S 143(3) R.W.S 263 OF THE ACT, DATED 13.3.2013 BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS. 3. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAID TRIBUNALS ORDER (SUPRA), DATED 5.2.2014, WE FIND , VIDE PARA 15, THE TRIBUNAL S ET ASIDE THE REVISION ORDER OF THE CIT. CONSIDERING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SAID ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLETENESS OF THIS ORDER, THE RELEVANT LINES ARE EXTRACTED AS UNDER: - 15. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES, AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE APPEAL, AS WOULD BE APPARENT, WOULD BECOME INFRUCTUOUS IN VIEW OF OUR DECISION IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ON QUANTUM, FOLLOWING THE CONSISTENT VIEW OF THE TRIBUNAL, THAT SECTION 115JB IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. WE, ACCORDINGLY, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGN ED ORDER............. 4. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL, THE FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER MADE BY THE AO DOES NOT HAVE LEGS TO STAND. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS. THUS, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH MARCH, 2016. S D/ - SD/ - ( RAM LAL NEGI ) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOU NTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 16.3.2016 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI