PALLAVI JENS P. LTD, V. ITO WD 9(2)(4),

MA 588/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3585 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-04-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 20-08-2009
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH: MUM BAI BEFORE SHRI R S SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI D K AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO 588/MUM/2009 ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS 173, 3215, 3204, 3216, 3605, 3217, 3681, 3218, 3682/MUM/2003 & ITAS 4736 AND 4455/MUM/2004 , FOR A YS 1995-1996 TO 1999- 2000 & AYS 2000-01 AND 2000-01 ACIT 5(1), MUMBAI VS ESSAR PROJECTS LTD, ESSAR HOUSE, 11, M K MARG, MAHALAXMI, MUMBAI -400 034 PAN: AAACU 4122 G APPLICANT RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY: MR T T JACOB RESPONDENT BY: MR VIJAY MEHTA ORDER PER R S SYAL THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION (MA) U/S 254(2) OF T HE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 HAS BEEN MOVED BY THE REVENUE PRAYING FOR THE RECTIFICATION OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 8.1.2008 PASSED IN ABOVE CAPTION ED ITAS IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1995-96 TO 2000-01. 2. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE CO NTENDED THAT THE TRIBUNAL PASSED CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION EX PARTE QUA THE REVENUE. IT WAS, THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE SAI D ORDER BE RECALLED AND THE MATTER BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR A FRESH DECISION AS PER LAW. IN THE OPPOSITION, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENT ATIVE CONTENDED THAT THE REVENUE WENT UP IN APPEAL AGAINST THIS TRIBUNAL ORD ER BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT, WHICH HAS SINCE BEEN DISMISSED VIDE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT MA 588/M/2009 ESSAR PROJECTS LTD 2 DATED 22.7.2009. A COPY OF THIS JUDGMENT WAS PLACE D ON RECORD. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE MA FILED AFTER THE JUDGMENT, SH OULD BE DISMISSED. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS NOTED THAT THE REVENUE WENT IN APP EAL BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT, WHICH HAS SINCE BEEN DISMISSED. RESULTANTLY , THE TRIBUNAL ORDER STANDS MERGED WITH THAT OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. AS SUCH THERE CANNOT BE ANY QUESTION OF RECALLING OR MODIFYING THIS ORDER ON A CALL FROM A REVENUE AFTER THE DISMISSAL OF THEIR APPEAL BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT . 4. IN THE RESULT, MA IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 16TH APRIL 2010. SD/- ( D K AGARWAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- ( R S SYAL ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 16TH APRIL 2010 COPY TO:- 1) THE APPLICANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CCIT (A) CONCERNED .., MUMBAI. 4) THE CIT - CONCERNED .., MUMBAI. 5) THE D.R. D BENCH, MUMBAI. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., MUMBAI CHAVAN* MA 588/M/2009 ESSAR PROJECTS LTD 3 SR.N. EPISODE OF AN ORDER DATE INITIALS CONCERNED 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 16.4.2010 SR.PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 16.4.2010 SR.PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/PS 7 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS/PS 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER *