ACIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. Stone Wonders (India) Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 805/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6556 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH D CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO. 805/MDS/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1999-2000 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-VI(4), CHENNAI 600 034. VS. M/S. STONE WONDERS (INDIA) LTD. NO.76, CATHEDRAL ROAD, CHENNAI 600 086. PAN AABCS 0400 J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.E.B.RENG ARAJAN, JR. STAN DING COUNSEL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PHILIP GEORGE, ADVOCATE O R D E R PER DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 1999-2000. THIS APPEAL IS DIREC TED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEAL S)-V, AT CHENNAI DATED 4.2.2011. THE APPEAL ARISES OUT OF T HE ITA 805/11 :- 2 -: ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SEC.143(3) READ WITH SEC .263 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT COMPLETED IN THE PRESENT CASE WAS SET ASIDE BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX THROUGH REVISIONAL ORDER PASSED UNDER SEC.263. THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREAFTER REVISED THE ASSESSMENT IN OBEDIENCE OF THE REVISION ORDER. THE SAID REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BEEN TAKEN IN APP EAL BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS). HE DECID ED THE MATTER IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS AGAINST TH AT, THE REVENUE HAS COME IN APPEAL BEFORE US. BUT IT IS TO BE SEEN THAT THE REVISION ORDER ITSELF WAS CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSE E BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL. THE SAID APPEAL IN ITA NO. 714 /MDS/2007 WAS CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THEIR ORDER DATED 10.11.2008. ACCEPTING THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE TRIB UNAL HELD THAT THE REVISION ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER WAS N OT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW. THE REVISION ORDER PASSED BY T HE COMMISSIONER WAS QUASHED. 3. NOW THE MATTER IS VERY CLEAR. WHEN THE REVISION ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER UNDER SEC.263 ITSELF HAS BEEN QUASHED BY THE TRIBUNAL, EVEN THE REVISED ASSESSMEN T ORDER ITA 805/11 :- 3 -: PASSED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY DOES NOT EXIST IN LAW. BETTER NOT TO SPEAK ABOUT THE CORRESPONDING FIRST APPELLAT E ORDER AND THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THAT APPELLATE ORDER. THEREFORE, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE HAS BEC OME INFRUCTUOUS. 4. IN RESULT, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS D ISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING, ON THURSDAY, THE 14 TH DAY OF JULY, 2011 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) (DR.O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED THE 14 TH JULY, 2011 MPO* COPY TO : APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT/CIT(A)/DR