THE ACIT, 3(1), Indore V. M/S. JAWAHARLAL PANNALAL NEMA (HUF), Indore

MA 54/Ind/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9376 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 05-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K G GOYAL
• Section: 54B

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO.54/IND/2019 (ARISING OUT OF IT(SS)A NO.81/IND/2015) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 ACIT, 3 (1) INDORE / VS. M/S JAWAHARLAL PANNALAL NEMA (HUF), 43/4, PRAGATI KESAR BAGH ROAD, INDORE ( REVENUE ) ( RE SPONDENT ) P.A. NO. AADHJ1112M REVENUE BY SHRI K. G. GO YA L, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY SHRI KAILASH AGRAWAL , AR DATE OF HEARING: 22.11.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 07.01.2020 / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: THIS MISC. APPLICATION BY REVENUE SEEKING FOR RECTI FICATION OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 08.01.2019 PERTAINING I N ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 PASSED IN IT(SS)A NO.81/IND/2015. IT IS CON TENTION OF THE REVENUE THAT INADVERTENTLY THE TRIBUNAL HAS RESTORE D THE MATTER WHICH WAS NOT ADJUDICATED BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO THE FILE O F ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) OPPOSED THE S UBMISSION. MA NO.54/IND/2019 JAWAHARLAL PANNALAL NEMA 2 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL, WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 9 OF THE ORDER HAS FOLLOW ED THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. TOLARAM HASSOMAL 298 ITR 22(MP) . THE ISSUES HAVE BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. AO, INADVERTENTLY, WE, THEREFORE, RECTIFY OUR O RDER DATED 08.01.2019 AND THE PARAGRAPH 9 OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CROSS OBJECTION NO.66/IND/2015 MAY BE READ AS UNDER: 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RAISED ISSUED O F RECORDING OF SATISFACTION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE SEARCH ED PERSON AS WELL AS ALLOWABILITY OF DEDUCTION U/S 54B OF THE ACT. BOTH THESE GROUNDS HAVE NOT BEEN ADJUDICATED BY THE LD. CIT(A). WE, ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE ADJUDICATED THIS GROUND. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. TOLARAM HASSOMAL 298 I TR 22(MP) WE RESTORE BOTH THE GROUNDS TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE CASE AFRESH. THE ORDER IS ACCORDINGLY MODIFIED. 4. IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE RE VENUE IS ALLOWED IN TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07 .01.2 020. SD/- (MANISH BORAD) SD/- (KUL BHARAT) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER INDORE; DATED : 07 / 01/2020 CTX? P.S/. . . COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/GUA RD FILE. BY ORDER PRIVATE SECRETARY/DDO, INDORE