RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI

ITA 8210/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 71407 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-10-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 14-10-2013
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 07-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: H C PANT
• Keywords: Revised return
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI . . , . ! , ' # BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JM AND RAJENDRA, AM ./ I.T.A. NO.8210/MUM/2011 ( $ $ $ $ % % % % / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD., 3 RD FLOOR, MAKER CHAMBER- IV, 222, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400 021. $ $ $ $ / VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT, 29 TH FLOOR, CENTER NO.1, WORLD TRADE CENTRE, CUFF PARADE, MUMBAI 400005 & ' ./ ' ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAACR 5055K ( &( / APPELLANT ) .. ( )*&( / RESPONDENT ) &( + / APPELLANT BY: SHRI H.C.PANT )*&( , + / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANJEEV JAIN $ , -' / DATE OF HEARING : 14/10/2013 ./% , -' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14/10/2013 0 / O R D E R PER I.P.BANSAL,J.M: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS D IRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A)-24, MUMBAI DATED 28/09/2011 UN DER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING A LETTER DATED 7/10/2013 IS FILED BY THE LD. AR, THE CONTENTS OF WHICH ARE AS UNDER: THE ABOVE APPEAL HAS BEEN FIXED FOR HEARING ON 14 TH OCT. 2013 BEFORE YOUR HOUR. IN THIS CONNECTION, WE HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS CLAIM OF EXEMPTION OF INCOME U/S.20(23G) OTHER THAN BY FILING THE REVISED RETURN. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE HONBLE MUMBAI B ENCH IN ITA NO.4475/MUM/07. IN VIEW OF ABOVE WE WISH TO WITHDR AW THE ABOVE APPEAL. ./ I.T.A. NO.8210/MUM/2011 ( $ $ $ $ % % % % / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 2 A COPY OF THE AFOREMENTIONED LETTER WAS GIVEN TO LD . DR. LD. DR DID NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTION ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WITHDR AWING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 3. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION, AFTER HEARING BOT H THE PARTIES, WE PERMIT THE ASSESSEE TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, APPEA L FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 /10/2013 . 0 , ./% ' 1 2$3 14 /10//2013 / , 4 SD/- SD/- ! (RAJENDRA) . . (I.P.BANSAL) ' /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; 2$ DATED 14/10/2013 . $ . .VM , SR. PS 0 0 0 0 , ,, , )-56 )-56 )-56 )-56 7 6%- 7 6%- 7 6%- 7 6%- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. &( / THE APPELLANT 2. )*&( / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 8 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. 8 / CIT 5. 694 )-$ , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 4: ; / GUARD FILE. 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ / BY ORDER, *6- )- //TRUE COPY// < << < / = = = = (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI