MEHTA FINSTOCK PVT. LTD., MUMBAI V. ACIT - 4(3), MUMBAI

MA 138/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5470 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 24-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C S SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: NIDHI PATEL

Judgement Text

, , , , INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL -BBENCH MUMBAI , ,, , , , , , , ,, , BEFORE S/SHRI RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SAKTIJIT DEY,JUDICIAL MEMBER / MA NO.138/MUM/2016 (ARISING OUT OF / ITA NO.3116/MUM/2011) /ASSESSMENT YEAR-2007-08) M/S. MEHTA FINSTOCK PVT. LTD. 612, ARUN CHAMBERS, TARDEO MUMBAI-400 034. PAN:AAACK 2231 L VS. ACIT-4(3), ROOM NO.649, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD MUMBAI-400020. (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT ) REV ENUE BY: SHRI C.S. SHARMA ASS ESSEE BY: MS. NIDHI PATEL / DATE OF HEARING: 30.09.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30.09.2016 ,1961 254(1) ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961(ACT) , ! / PER RAJENDRA A.M. - VIDE ITS APPLICATION DATED 24.06.16 THE ASSESSEE H AS STATED THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN MISTAKES IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DT.14/10/15, THAT THE SA ME WERE TO BE RECTIFIED AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT, THAT WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL (PARA 5.1) THE TRIBUNAL SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER (A.O.). 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US THE AUTHORI SED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) ARGUED THAT THE AO HAD NOT PASSED THE CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER, THAT THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT (383ITR1) HAD REVERSED THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT DELIVERED IN THE CASE OF KOTAK SECURITIES LIMITED. THE DR STATED THAT MATTER COULD BE DECIDED ON MERITS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL BEFORE US. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAD RESTORED THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO AND HAD DIRECTED THE AO TO MAKE VERIFICATION.CONSIDERING THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE D ELHI HIGH COURT DELIVERED IN THE CASE OF MA-138/M/16-MEHTA FINSTOCK 2 ANSAL LANDMARK TOWNSHIP (P.) LTD. AND PERFECT CIRCL E INDIA LTD. IN OUR OPINION, THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, THEREFORE, WE ARE REJECTING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO PASS THE N ECESSARY ORDER GIVING EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF FOUR WEEKS FROM THE RECEIPT OF THE ORDER IF HE HAS NOT ALREADY PASSED THE NECESSARY ORDER. MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STA NDS DISMISSED. . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2016. 30 , 2016 SD/- SD/- ( / SAKTIJIT DEY ) ( / RAJENDRA ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 30. 09.2016. JV.SR.PS. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT / 2. RESPONDENT / 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / 5. DR A BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / , , . . . 6. GUARD FILE/ //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , /ITAT, MUMBAI.