M/s. V.M.Sons, Trichy V. ITO, Trichy

MA 148/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5899 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-12-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 26-11-2010
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: D- BENCH:CHENN AI (BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL M EMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) MA NO.148/MDS/2010 IN ITA NO.1090/ MDS/06 ASST. YEAR 2001-02 M/S V.M.SONS, NOW A DISSOLVED FIRM REPRESENTED BY SHRI BASHEER AHMED, 26/55 MAIN KANDY ST. BEEMANAGAR, TRICHY. PAN AASFV8652M VS THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, CIR.II, TRICHY (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY: RESPONDENT BY: SRI K.MEENAKSHISUNDARAM SRI B.SRINIVAS ORDER PER ABRAHAM P.GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS A MISC. PETITION FILED BY ONE SHRI M.BASHEE R AHMED ON BEHALF OF A DISSOLVED FIRM M/S V.M. SONS. M/S V.M.S ONS WAS APPELLANT IN ITA NO.1090/MDS/2006. AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 2 ND SEPT., 2008 OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1090/MDS/2006 A MISC. PETIT ION NUMBERED AS MISC. PETITION NO.111/MDS/09, WAS EARLIER FILED BY M/S V.M. SONS. SUCH MP 148/MDS/10 2 MISC. PETITION WAS SIGNED BY ONE SHRI V.M.SHAHUL HA MEED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE FIRM M/S V.M.SONS. THE SAID MISC. PET ITION NUMBERED AS MP 111/MDS/09, WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR NON P ROSECUTION VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 10-11-2009. 2. NOW WE FIND THAT THE MISC. PETITION PRESENTLY FI LED IS ALSO RAISING SAME GRIEVANCE AS RAISED IN THE EARLIER MISC. PETIT ION NO.111/MDS/09. HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF DR .S.PANNEERSELVAM VS. ACIT (319 ITR 135) HAS ALREADY HELD THAT BE A MISC. PETITION CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED WHEN THERE WAS AN EARLIER MISC. PETITI ON WHICH WAS DISPOSED OF BY THE TRIBUNAL SINCE THE RULE OF MERGER APPLIES . 3. THOUGH THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER HAS R ELIED ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGHCOURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF KIKABHAI ABDUL ALI V. ITAT (32 ITR 762), WE FIND THAT THE SAID DECISIO N OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT WAS REGARDING RIGHTS OF PERSONS W HO BECAME LIABLE TO PAY TAX TO APPEAL OR TO APPLY FOR REFERENCE. HONBL E BOMBAY HIGH COURT WAS DEALING WITH A CASE OF A REFERENCE MADE BY A PE RSON OTHER THAN A PERSON WHO HAD FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN OUR OPINION, THIS WOULD NOT HELP THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, SINCE ALRE ADY A MISC. PETITION WAS FILED ON THE SAME GRIEVANCE BY ONE OF THE PARTNERS FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE DISSOLVED FIRM AND THIS WAS DISMISSED BY THE TR IBUNAL. HENCE WE ARE MP 148/MDS/10 3 UNABLE TO ENTERTAIN THE MISC. PETITION PRESENTLY FI LED. THE MISC. PETITION THEREFORE, STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03-12 -2010. SD/- SD/- ( HARI OM MARATHA) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI: 3 RD DEC., 2010 NBR CC: ASSESSEE/ ASSESSING OFFICER/ CIT(A)/ CIT/ D .R/ GUARD FILE.