: : IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBULAL RAJKOT BENCH: RAJKOT 0 00 0 0 00 0 , , , , ! ' ! ' ! ' ! ', , , , #$ #$ #$ #$ BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ././ ./ ITA NO.596/RJT/2014 ' (' ' (' ' (' ' ('/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SHRI PARESH VASANTRAI SHETH M/S. V.B. SHETH & CO., DHANRAJ, DR. RADHAKRISHNAN ROAD, SADAR, RAJKOT PAN : AIVPS 5393 P VS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX I, RAJKOT )* )* )* )* / // / (APPELLANT) +, +, +, +, )* )*)* )* / // / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE(S) BY : SHRI KULDEEP R. SHETH, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI M.L. MEENA, CIT-DR - . ' // // / DATE OF HEARING : 18/02/2015 0( . ' / /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/02/2015 1 1 1 1/ // / O R D E R PER BENCH : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I, RAJ KOT DATED 09.09.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APP EAL:- 1. LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF APPEAL HAS ERRED IN REJE CTING OUR APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPEAL IS ALREADY DECIDED BY A CO-T ERMINUS AUTHORITY AND HENCE CANNOT BE RE-ADJUDICATED. ITA NO. 596-RJT-2014 PARESH VASANTRAI SHETH AY 2010-11 - 2 - 2. LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF APPEALS HAS ALSO ERRED I N CONSIDERING OUR APPEAL AS INFRUCTUOUS IN AS MUCH AS THE APPEAL WAS AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) AND PARTICULARLY WHEN THE C ONCERNED AUTHORITY HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE DIRECTION AS REFERRED IN PARA 4.0 OF THE ORDER. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF APPEAL HAS ALSO ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT UNLESS THE DEMAND RAISED IN INTIMATED TO ASSES SEE, THE ADJUDICATIVE AUTHORITY HAS NO JURISDICTION TO WITHHELD REFUND FO R THE A.Y. 10-11. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL. HE ALSO SUBMIT TED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADJUSTMENT OF THE DEMAN D PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, THE CIT-DR SUBMITTED THAT THE P RESENT APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN RESPECT OF THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE, NECESSARY DIRECTIONS HAS ALREADY BEEN ISSUED BY THE CIT(A)-JAMNAGAR IN HIS ORDER DATED 19.11.2013 WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER U/S 143(1) AND 154 OF THE ACT FOR RELEVANT AS SESSMENT YEAR UNDER REFERENCE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON REC ORD. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A)-I, RAJKOT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN PARAGRAPH 4 HAS GIVEN HIS FINDINGS ON FACTS. HIS FINDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN CONTR OVERTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT (A)-I, RAJKOT HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN APPEAL BEFORE HI M WAS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) JAMNAGAR, IN WHICH CERTAIN DIRECTIONS HAS ALREADY BEEN ISSUED BY THE CIT(A) JAMNAGAR. TH EREFORE, WE DO NOT SEE ITA NO. 596-RJT-2014 PARESH VASANTRAI SHETH AY 2010-11 - 3 - ANY GOOD REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-I, RAJKOT AND THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY REJ ECTED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 27/02/2015 *BIJU T. 1 1 1 1 . .. . +'2 +'2 +'2 +'2 32(' 32(' 32(' 32(' / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. )* / APPELLANT- 2. +,)* / RESPONDENT- 3. 7 ' 8 / CONCERNED CIT/DIT 4. 8() / THE CIT(A)-I, RAJKOT 4 . 2! ; +' , , / DR, ITAT, RAJKOT 5 . ; <' = > / GUARD FILE. 1 1 1 1 / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY ? ?? ?/ // /@ @ @ @ ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) / ITAT, RAJKOT