ASST CIT CIR 19(2), MUMBAI V. ADITI DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

ITA 7342/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8576 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 02-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURINDER JIT SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJIV M SHAH
• Section: 143(3); 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI I. P. BANSAL, JM AND SHRI RAJENDRA, AM ITA NO. : 7342/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 A.C.I.T. 19(2), ROOM NO.315, 3 RD FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG, PAREL, MUMBAI-400 012 VS. M/S. ADITI DEVELOPERS SATELLITE BUILDING, TAGORE ROAD, SANTACRUZ (W), MUMBAI-400 054 PAN NO: AAJFA 0415 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SURINDERJIT SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANJIV M. SHAH DATE OF HEARING : 1 0 . 10 .2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 0 . 10 .2012 ORDER PER I. P. BANSAL, JM : THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE, IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-30, MUMBAI DATED 30.08.2011 FO R THE A.Y. 2006-07. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READS AS UNDER :- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT T HE ORDER PASSED U/S.143(3) RWS 263 OF THE I.T. ACT HAS BECOM E INFRUCTOUS FOR THE REASON THAT THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS QUASHED THE ORDER U/S.263 OF THE I.T. ACT IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS BEEN CHALLEN GED BEFORE THE HIGH COURT. 2. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE GROUND BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE AO BE RES TORED. ITA NO : 7342/MUM/2011 M/S. ADITI DEVELOPERS 2 3. AS IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, TH E LD. CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RE ASON THAT THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT DOES NOT SURVIVE AS THE VERY BASIS FOR F RAMING THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN QUASHED BY THE TRIBUNAL. THE I MPUGNED ASSESSMENT IS FRAMED VIDE ORDER DATED 29.12.2010 UN DER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 143(3) R.W.S 263 OF THE ACT. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED BEFORE US THE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBU NAL DATED 07.01.2011 VIDE WHICH ORDER U/S.263 DATED 25.03.2010, ON THE B ASIS OF WHICH IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN FRAMED, HAS BEEN QUASH ED WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS :- 19. THUS THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE AO IS A POSSIBLE VI EW AND THE C.I.T. HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT THE ORDER IS E RRONEOUS INASMUCH AS IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE REVENUE. AS T HE ISSUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SOLE POINT THAT THE C.I.T. SOUGHT TO SUBSTITUTE HIS OPINION FOR THAT OF THE AO, WE DO NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO ADJUDICATE THE OTHER LEGAL ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AS IT WOULD BE AN ACADEMIC E XERCISE. IN THE RESULT, WE QUASH THE ORDER PASSED U/S.263 O F THE ACT AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 4. IT WAS ALSO BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THE HON'B LE BOMBAY HIGH COURT VIDE THEIR ORDER DATED 13.09.2011 PASSED IN I NCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.882 OF 2011 (APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT) HAS UPHELD THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE WHICH ORDER PASSED BY T HE LD. CIT(A) U/S.263 WAS QUASHED. 5. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL AND THE SAME IS DISMISSED. ITA NO : 7342/MUM/2011 M/S. ADITI DEVELOPERS 3 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2012. SD/- SD/- ( RAJENDRA ) ( I. P. BANSAL ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DT: 10.10.2012 COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT, 2. THE RESPONDENT, 3. THE C.I.T. 4. CIT (A) 5. THE DR, - BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI ROSHANI