The ACIT, Mehsana Circle, Mehsana V. Shri Sendhabhai M.Desai & Others, Mehsana

MA 138/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6276 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 14-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K DHANISTA
• Keywords: Block assessment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND D. C. AGRAWAL , AM) M. A. NO.138/AHD/2010 (IN IT (SS)A NO.154/AHD/2006 BLOCK PERIOD ENDING ON 28.08.1997) THE A. C. I. T., MEHSANA CIRCLE, 2 ND FLOOR, APOLLO ENCLAVE, HIGHWAY, MEHSANA VS SHRI SENDHABHAI M. DESAI AND OTHERS (AOP), C/O. KHEGARBHAI B DESAI, URVASHI BUNGLOW, NR. RAMASANA JAKATNAKA, MEHSANA 384 002 PA NO. - (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI R. K. DHANISTA, DR RESPONDENT BY NONE (WRITTEN SUBMISSION) ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI : THIS MISC. APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 22- 01-2010 WHEREBY THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL WAS DISMISSED AND THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED. 2. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL WHILE CONSIDERING THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL AND THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE DECI DED THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES OF THE ABOVE CASE, THE AO WAS JUSTIFIED IN INITIATING PROC EEDINGS U/S 158BD OF THE IT ACT OR PASSING BLOCK ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 158 BD OF THE IT ACT ON PROTECTIVE BASIS IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE (AOP)? THE TRIBUNAL CONSIDERING THE DETAILS SET ASIDE THE ORDE RS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND QUASHED THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 158BD OF THE IT ACT. IT WAS ALSO HELD THAT THE AO DID NOT VA LIDLY ASSUMED JURISDICTION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE (AOP). SINCE, THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE MA NO.138/AHD/2010 (IN IT(SS)A NO.154/AHD/2006) ACIT ,MEHSANA CIRCLE VS SENDHABHAI M. DESAI & OTHER S. 2 WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, A DDITIONS ON MERIT WERE DELETED. IT IS MERELY STATED IN THE MISC. APPL ICATION THAT THE ISSUE MAY KINDLY BE CONSIDERED PROPERLY ON MERIT. HOWEVER , IT WAS NOT POINTED OUT DURING THE COURSE OF ARGUMENT BY THE LE ARNED DR AS TO HOW THE ISSUE WAS NOT PROPERLY CONSIDERED WHILE DEC IDING THE CROSS APPEALS. IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NO POWER TO REVIEW ITS EARLIER ORDER DECIDED ON MERITS. WE ARE FORTIFIED I N OUR VIEW BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ANAMIKA BUILDERS 251 ITR 585, DECISION OF HONBLE M. P. HIG H COURT IN THE CASE OF AGRAWAL WAREHOUSING 257 ITR 235 AND THE DEC ISION OF THE HONBLE ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ID EAL ENGINEERING 251 ITR 743. THE LEARNED DR COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. MI SC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE HAS, THEREFORE, NO MERIT AND THE SAM E IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08-04-2011 SD/- SD/- (D. C. AGRAWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 08-04-2011 LAKSHMIKANT/- MA NO.138/AHD/2010 (IN IT(SS)A NO.154/AHD/2006) ACIT ,MEHSANA CIRCLE VS SENDHABHAI M. DESAI & OTHER S. 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD