ITO (Hqrs.), O/o. CIT(Audit), Hyderabad, Hyderabad V. Bhavani Jewellers, Hyderabad, Hyderabad

MA 114/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3611 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 06-10-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B KURMI NAIDU
• Assessee Lawyers: M V JOSHI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO. 114/HYD/2015 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 1136/HYD/2012) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 INCO ME TAX OFFICER (HQRS), O/O. CIT (AUDIT), (THE THEN ITO, WARD-8(2), HYDERABAD (APPLICANT) VS M/S. BHAVANI JEWELLERS, HYDERABAD [PAN: AADFB7724K] (RESPONDENT) FOR REVENUE : SHRI B. KURMI NAIDU, DR FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI M.V. JOSHI, AR DATE OF HEARING : 27-11-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27-11-2015 O R D E R PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. : THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS PREFERRED BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) ON WHOM COST OF RS. 500/- WA S LEVIED, WHILE DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. BHAVAN I JEWELLERS, HYDERABAD ON 15-07-2015 IN ITA NO. 1136/HYD/2012. WHILE DISPOSING OFF THE APPEALS, THE ITAT HAS AWARDED COS T ON THE AO, WHO PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND ALSO ON THE AO WHO 2 M.A. NO. 114/HYD/2015 M/S. BHAVANI JEWELLERS PREFERRED SECOND APPEAL. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF T HE ORDER OF THE ITAT IS AS UNDER: ON THE FACTS OF THIS CASE, WE ARE CONSTRAINED TO LEVY A TOKEN COST OF RS. 1,000/- ON THE AO WHO PASSED TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER AND FURTHER COST OF RS. 500/- ON THE AO WHO P REFERRED SECOND APPEAL. THESE SHOULD BE COLLECTED FROM THEIR SALAR Y AND DEPOSITED IN TO THE TREASURY AS PER THE RULES. ANY ENTRY IN THEIR PERSONAL RECORD SHOULD ALSO BE MADE BY THE SUPERIOR AUTHORIT Y SO THAT AO WOULD NOT REPEAT THE SAME IN FUTURE .. THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS PREFERRED BY THE AO, WHO AT THE RELEVANT POINT OF TIME PREFERRED THE SECOND APPEAL. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), THE AO HAS SUBMITTED AN AAO REPORT DT. 31-05-2012 IN WH ICH ALL THE ISSUES WERE DISCUSSED AND THE AO HAS NOT SUGGESTED FURTHER APPEAL ON ANY OF THE ISSUES. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMIT TED THAT VIDE LETTER IN F.NO. BATCH-25(07)/CIT-II/12-13 DT. 23-07 -2012, HE WAS DIRECTED TO FILE FURTHER APPEAL AND ACCORDINGLY, AT THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CIT-II, HYDERABAD, AO HAS PREFERRED THE APPEAL. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT AO HAD PREFERRED APPEAL ONLY TO DISC HARGE HIS OFFICIAL DUTIES AND TO FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY SUPERIOR AUTHORITIES AS THE THEN AO AND IN THE ABOVE FACTUAL SITUATION AWARDING COST ON THE AO OF RS. 500/- IS NOT APPROPR IATE AND REQUESTED TO WITHDRAW THE COST SO LEVIED. 2. AFTER CONSIDERING THE CONTENTIONS OF THIS AO AND PERUSING THE REPORTS SUBMITTED BY HIM TO CIT-II, HYDERABAD, WE A GREE THAT THE ROLE OF THE AO IN PREFERRING THE APPEAL IS LIMITED TO FOLLOWING THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY THE SR. OFFICER IN PREFERRING T HE SECOND APPEAL. 3 M.A. NO. 114/HYD/2015 M/S. BHAVANI JEWELLERS IN VIEW OF THIS, WE HEREBY WITHDRAW THE COST LEVIED ON THE AO WHO PREFERRED THE SECOND APPEAL. THE ORDER TO THAT EXT ENT STANDS MODIFIED. 3. IN THE RESULT, PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 27 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 27 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 TNMM COPY TO : 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER , (HQRS), O/O. CIT (AUDIT), (THE THEN ITO, WARD-8(2), HYDERABAD.) 2. M/S. BHAVANI JEWELLERS, 21-2-149, CHARKAMAN, HYDERABAD. C/O. P. MURALI & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTA NTS, 6 - 3 - 655/2/3, 1 ST FLOOR, SOMAJIGUDA, H YDERABAD. 3 . THE CIT(APPEALS) - I II , HYDERABAD. 4. THE CIT-II, HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE