Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

MA 103/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8920 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 20-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S DAS GUPTA IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: R VIJAYARAGHAVAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NOS.100, 101, 113, 102 & 103(MDS)/2012 IN ITA NOS.1618, 1619(MDS)/2011, 2146(MDS)/2008 AND 16 20 & 1621(MDS)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS:2003-04 TO 2007-08 M/S.CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DARE HOUSE , 2-NSC BOSE ROAD, CHENNAI-600 002. PAN AABCC6633K. VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT, CHENNAI. (PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI R.VIJAYARAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.DAS GUPTA, IRS, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 24 TH AUGUST, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24 TH AUGUST, 2012 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT: THESE FIVE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS ARE FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE. THEY RELATE TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003 -04 TO 2007-08. THE PETITIONS ARE IN THE NATURE OF RECTIF ICATION PETITIONS. - - MP 100, 101, ETC. OF 2012 2 THE PETITIONS ARE FILED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE COMMO N ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 9-5-2012, WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL H AS SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND REMITTED BA CK THE FILES TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DE NOVO DISPOSAL OF THE I SSUES. 2. NOW, THE MISTAKE POINTED OUT BY THE PETITIONER IS THAT ALL THE RELEVANT DETAILS AND EVIDENCES WERE PR ODUCED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND, THEREFORE, IT WAS NOT NE CESSARY TO REMIT BACK THE FILES TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE TRI BUNAL SHOULD DECIDE THE ISSUES BY THEMSELVES, ON MERITS. 3. THE TRIBUNAL HAS TAKEN A CONSCIOUS DECISION IN REMITTING THE MATTERS BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER . NOW THE ASSESSEE WANTS TO RECALL THE SAID DIRECTION AND DEC IDE THE APPEALS BY THE TRIBUNAL ITSELF ON MERITS. THEREFOR E, WHAT IS PRAYED FOR BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT TO RECTIFY ANY MI STAKE, BUT TO CHANGE THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE EARLIE R ORDER. THIS IS SOMETHING MORE THAN REVIEW OF THE EARLIER ORDER. THE POINT RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT AMOUNT TO ANY MISTA KE. THE ASSESSEE, IN FACT, WANTS TO CHANGE THE ORDER ITSELF . AS SUCH, THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS ARE LIABLE TO BE DISM ISSED. - - MP 100, 101, ETC. OF 2012 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON FRIDAY, THE 24 TH OF AUGUST, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED THE 24 TH AUGUST, 2012. V.A.P. COPY TO: (1) PETITIONE R (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) D.R. (6) G.F.