ACIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., CHENNAI

MA 180/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9637 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 14-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAJI P JACOB IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: G SITARAMAN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

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. NO. IN ITA NOS. A.Y. 174(MDS)/2012 1603 & 1671(MDS)/2011 2001-02 175(MDS)/2012 1604 & 1672(MDS)/2011 2002-03 176(MDS)/2012 1605, 1753 & 1673(MDS)/2011 2003-04 177(MDS)/2012 1606 & 1688(MDS)/2011 2004-05 178(MDS)/2012 1607, 1689 & 1690(MDS)/2011 2005-06 179(MDS)/2012 1608 & 1691(MDS)/2011 2006-07 180(MDS)/2012 1609 & 1692(MDS)/2011 2007-08 181(MDS)/2012 1610 & 1693(MDS)/2011 2008-09 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER M/S.UNITED INDIA INSURANCE OF INCOME-TAX, VS. CO . LTD., 24-WHITES ROAD, LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT, CHENN AI-600 014. CHENNAI. PAN AAACU5552C. (PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI SHAJI P JAC OB, IRS, ADDL.CIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.SITARAMAN, C.A. DATE OF HEARING : 14 TH DECEMBER, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14 TH DECEMBER, 2012 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS FILED BY THE REVENU E ARE IN THE NATURE OF RECTIFICATION PETITIONS. THEY SEEK T O RECTIFY THE - - MP NOS.174 TO 181 OF 2012 2 MISTAKE APPARENT IN THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 9 TH MAY, 2012 IN THE APPEALS FILED BOTH BY THE ASSESSE E AND THE REVENUE. 2. THOSE APPEALS WERE DISPOSED OF BY THE TRIBUNAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. THE FILES HAVE BEEN REMITTED BACK TO THE ASSESSING AUTHORITIES CON CERNED FOR DE NOVO DISPOSAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING T HE ASSESSEE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 3. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE ORDER, NOW THE MISTAK E POINTED OUT BY THE REVENUE IS THAT THE TRIBUNAL OUG HT TO HAVE DECIDED THE MATTER ON MERIT WITHOUT SENDING BACK TH E FILES TO THE ASSESSING AUTHORITIES, AS ALL THE NECESSARY MATERIA LS ARE AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 4. WE CONSIDERED THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THESE RECTIFICATION PETITIONS. WE HAVE ALREADY DISPOSED OF THE APPEALS. WE HAVE DISPOSED OF THE APPEALS BY REMITTING BACK T HE MATTER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICERS. THE FILES HAVE BEEN REMITT ED BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICERS NOT FOR THE REASON THAT THE MATE RIALS ARE NOT AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE COMMON ORDER OF THE TRIBU NAL SPEAKS THE GROUNDS ON WHICH THE MATTERS WERE REMANDED BACK . NOW, - - MP NOS.174 TO 181 OF 2012 3 THE REVENUE CANNOT REQUEST THE TRIBUNAL TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEALS IN A PARTICULAR MANNER. 5. THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS FILED BY THE REVE NUE ARE FRIVOLOUS. THEY ARE DISMISSED. ORDERS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME O F HEARING ON FRIDAY, THE 14 TH OF DECEMBER, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) ( DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED, THE 14 TH DECEMBER, 2012. V.A.P. COPY TO: 1. PETITIONER 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GF.