DEPUTY COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -7(1) , MUMBAI V. DR. D.Y.PATIL EDUCATION SOCIETY, MUMBAI

MA 359/MUM/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6058 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 07-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: DHARMESH SHAH AW
• Section: 153C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) M.A. Nos. 359 & 360/MUM/2023 (Arising out of ITA Nos. 2293 & 2294/MUM/2021) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Asst. CIT, CC-7(1), R.No. 676B, 6 th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Vs. Dr. D.Y. Patil Education Society, 869, E Ward, Kasaba Vawada, Kolhapur-416006. PAN No. AAATD 8919 M Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Dharmesh Shah a/w Mr. Dhaval Shah Revenue by : Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08/09/2023 Date of pronouncement : 27/10/2023 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These Miscellaneous Applications by the Revenue Income-tax Department have been preferred for recalling/rectification of the order of the Tribunal dated 29.09.2022 passed in ITA No. 2293 and 2294/Mum/2021 for assessment year 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively. 2. In the Miscellaneous Application Tribunal has committed mistake in interpreting the provisions of section 153C of the Act, which seized document are to be considered ‘abatement’ of pending assessment/reassessment and reassessment u/s 153C of the Act are always to be reckoned from the date of the search books/documents. 3. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the Tribunal in the impugned order has followed the finding of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ITR 612 as binding precedent dispute. Therefore, we do not find any mistake in the order of the Tribunal on the issue in dispute and accordingly contention of the Ld. Departmental Representative in su Miscellaneous Application. 4. In the result, both the Miscellaneous Application Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on Sd/ (AMIT SHUKLA JUDICIAL MEMBER Dr. D.Y. Patil Education Society M.A Nos. 359 & 360/Mum/2023 In the Miscellaneous Applications, it is submitted that the Tribunal has committed mistake in interpreting the provisions of Act, which lays down that the date of receipt of are to be considered only for the purpo of pending assessment/reassessment and reassessment u/s 153C of the Act are always to be reckoned from the date of the search and irrespective of date of receipt of seized We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the Tribunal in the impugned order has followed the finding of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. RR Securities as binding precedent and accordingly decided the issue in dispute. Therefore, we do not find any mistake in the order of the Tribunal on the issue in dispute and accordingly contention of the Ld. Departmental Representative in su Miscellaneous Application. In the result, both the Miscellaneous Application Revenue are dismissed. nounced in the open Court on 27/10 Sd/- Sd/ AMIT SHUKLA) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dr. D.Y. Patil Education Society 2 M.A Nos. 359 & 360/Mum/2023 it is submitted that the Tribunal has committed mistake in interpreting the provisions of the date of receipt of only for the purpose of of pending assessment/reassessment and ‘six years’ for reassessment u/s 153C of the Act are always to be reckoned from and irrespective of date of receipt of seized We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the Tribunal in the impugned order has followed the finding of the CIT v. RR Securities 380 and accordingly decided the issue in dispute. Therefore, we do not find any mistake in the order of the Tribunal on the issue in dispute and accordingly, we reject the contention of the Ld. Departmental Representative in support of In the result, both the Miscellaneous Applications of the 10/2023. Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 27/10/2023 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// Dr. D.Y. Patil Education Society M.A Nos. 359 & 360/Mum/2023 Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Dr. D.Y. Patil Education Society 3 M.A Nos. 359 & 360/Mum/2023 BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai