DCIT 5(3)(1), MUMBAI V. SHRENUJ & COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

MA 180/MUM/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9705 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 05-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 16-02-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANKIT DOSHI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “J” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No.180/MUM/2023 (Arising out of IT (TP) No. 835/MUM/2015 A.Y.2010-11) DCIT, Circle -5(3)(1), Room No.573, 5 th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020. Vs. M/s Shrenuj & Co.Ltd., 405, Dharam Palace, 100/103, NS Patkar Marg, Mumbai -400007. PAN/GIR No. AAACS0690P ( /Applicant) ( /Respondent) Assessee by Shri.Ankit Doshi.AR Revenue by Shri.UjjwalkumarChavan.Sr.DR स ु नव ई /Date of Hearing 06.10.2023 घोषण /Date of Pronouncement 29.11.2023 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The revenue has filed the miscellaneous application (MA) in ITA No.835/MUM/2019 for the A.Y.2010-11 seeking rectification in the common order of the Hon’ble Tribunal dated 17.05.2022. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon’ble Tribunal in ITA. No.835/Mum/2022 for A.Y 2010-11 has dismissed the revenue appeal. Whereas the 2 M.A. No. 180/MUM/2023 (A.Y.: 2010-11) Shrenuj & Co. Ltd, Mumbai contentions of the Ld.DR are that the revenue appeal should have been kept in abeyance. Contra, the Ld.AR supported the order of the Honble tribunal. 3 . We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record, the sole disputed issue envisaged by the Ld.DR that the Hon’ble Tribunal has dismissed the revenue appeal instead of adjudication or should have kept in abeyance. Whereas the Tribunal along with the batch of the assessee appeals has dismissed the revenue appeal observing at Page 4 Para 3 of the order read as under: “3. We found as per the provisions of Sec. 14 of IBC-2016 till the conclusion proceedings under IBC-2016 no suit or proceedings can be continued against tt corporate debtor. Considering the facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that there is no point in proceeding with the appeals filed by the assessee and the revenue and also keeping the appeals pending is also a continuation proceedings. We consider the provisions of section 4 of IBC-2016 Laws and the facts of filling of petition before the NCLT Mumbai by the Creditors. Accordingly we dismiss the appeals filed by the assessee and the revenue. Further we grant the liberty to both the parties, if they so desire to move an application to recall the present order after the completion of insolvency resolution process” 4. Since, the revenue was provided liberty to make an application to recall the Honble Tribunal order after completion of insolvency resolution process. We are of 3 M.A. No. 180/MUM/2023 (A.Y.: 2010-11) Shrenuj & Co. Ltd, Mumbai the view that there is no necessity to give further directions on the issues. Accordingly, we do not find merits in the miscellaneous application filed by the revenue. 5. In the result, the miscellaneous application filed by the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 29.11.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 29/11/2023 KRK Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Mumbai