I.T.O.-1(1), Agra V. Agra Public Educational Society, Agra

MA 1/AGR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7638 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 16-03-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J L VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: SOHAIL AKHTAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI A. L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 01/AGRA/2012 (IN ITA NO. 313/AGRA/2010) ASST. YEAR : 2006-07 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, VS. AGRA PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, AGRA. 10, OLD VIJAY NAGAR COLONY, AGRA. (PAN : AABTA 2806 P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SOHAIL AKHTAR, JR. D.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI J.L. VERMA, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 16.03.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.03.2012 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. : THE TRIBUNAL NOTED IN THE ORDER DATED 28.06.2011 THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THE APPEAL AGAINST GROUNDS OF APPEAL AUTHORIZ ED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER. GROUNDS OF APPEAL WERE DIFFERENT BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L CONTRARY TO THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AUTHORIZED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER. THE TRIB UNAL IN PARA 3 HELD AS UNDER : WE ALSO FIND THAT THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER 1(1), AGR A HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL ON DIFFERENT GROUNDS WHICH WE HA VE REPRODUCED IN THE AFORESAID PARAGRAPH NO. 1. IN OUR CONSIDERED OP INION, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS DEFECTIVE AND IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. THEREF ORE, WE DISMISS THE SAME, BEING DEFECTIVE APPEAL WITH LIBERTY TO THE DE PARTMENT, IF SO DESIRED, TO FILE AN APPEAL AS PER AUTHORIZATION GIV EN BY LD. CIT-I, AGRA AS MENTIONED IN PARAGRAPH NO. 2 ABOVE. M.A. NO. 01/AGRA/2012 2 2. THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE DE PARTMENT FOR REVIVAL OF THE EARLIER APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT AS PER AUTHORIZATI ON GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT-I, AGRA. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS, WE FIND THAT T HE MA OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE BECAUSE THE TRIBUNAL FOUND THAT THE AP PEAL WAS DEFECTIVE AND LIBERTY WAS GIVEN TO THE DEPARTMENT TO FILE APPEAL AS PER A UTHORIZATION GIVEN. INSTEAD OF FILING M.A., THE REVENUE SHOULD FILE FRESH APPEAL A S PER AUTHORIZATION BY THE LD. CIT, IF SO DESIRED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THERE I S NO MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD. M.A. OF THE REVENUE IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. HOWEV ER, THE REVENUE MAY TAKE STEPS, IF SO ADVISED, FOR FILING FRESH APPEAL, AS W AS EARLIER DIRECTED BY THE TRIBUNAL. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MA IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.03.2012 SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR TRUE COPY