ITO, WARD- 2(4), NEW DELHI V. ANUJAY HYCARE PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

MA 560/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1833 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 9 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-06-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 05-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

MA.No.560/Del/2018 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA No.560/Del/2018 (In ITA No.4411/Del/2017) /Assessment Year: 2009-10 ITO, Ward 2(4), New Delhi. ब म Vs. M/s Anujay Hycare Products (P) Ltd., Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. C/o Satish Aggarwal & Associates, 4/5B, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi Appellant /Respondent राज वक ओरसे /Revenue by Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. Dr िनधा रतीक ओरसे /Assessee by Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA & Shri J.P. Sharma, CA स ु नवाईक तारीख/ Date of hearing: 03.11.2023 उ ोषणाक तारीख/Pronouncement on 04.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. Through this miscellaneous application the Revenue prays for recall of the order dated 06.04.2018 in ITA No. 4411/Del/2017 stating that the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee accepting the assessee’s contention that the assessment was made on a non-existent company. It is the contention of the Revenue in the miscellaneous application that the assessee never brought to MA.No.560/Del/2018 2 the notice of the Assessing Officer the letter dated 30.05.2011 issued by Registrar of Companies stating that w.e.f. 30.05.2011 the name of the assessee company was struck off in the register and the company was dissolved. The contention of the Revenue in the miscellaneous application is that since this order of the ROC was not brought to the AO assessee has misrepresented the facts and, therefore, it is prayed for recall of the order. 2. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the fact of ROC passing order w.e.f. 30.05.2011, wherein the name of the assessee was struck off from the register and the company was dissolved was in fact brought to the notice of the Ld.CIT(A) during appellate proceedings. Ld. Counsel submitted that this fact was already placed on record and the Tribunal considering all these facts allowed the appeal of the assessee and there is no mistake in passing the order of the Tribunal. 3. On hearing both the sides and perusing the order of the Tribunal, it is noticed that the Tribunal took cognizance of the fact that the assessee placing the order of ROC before Ld.CIT(A) during appellate proceedings. It is also observed from the order of the Tribunal that in the remand report there has been a reference to correspondence between Revenue Department and the ROC through MA.No.560/Del/2018 3 which certain information against the assessee company has been obtained by the Revenue. The Tribunal taking note of these facts has concluded that the assessment was made on a non-existent company. We do not find any mistake apparent on record in the order of the Tribunal so as to modify as suggested by the Revenue in the miscellaneous application. Thus, we reject the contentions raised in the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue. 4. In the result, miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 04/06/2024 Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (C.N. PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 04/06/2024 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy of order sent to- Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/Guard file of ITAT. By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT: Delhi Benches-Delhi