Hyundai Motor India Limited, Kancheepuram V. ACIT LTU-2, CHENNAI

MA 7/CHNY/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4888 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 25-02-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS R ANITA

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , D B ENCH, CHENNAI . , . , % BEFORE SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISC. PETITION NO. 7/CHNY/2021 (IN SP NO.11/CHNY/2020 & 154/CHNY/2020 IN ITA NO.3192/C HNY/2017) ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14) & MISC. PETITION NO. 8/CHNY/2021 (IN SP NO.10/CHNY/2020 & 155/CHNY/2020 IN IT(TP )A.NO. 70/CHNY/2018 ) ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) M/S. HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LTD. PLOT NO.H-1, SIPCOT INDUSTRIAL PARK IRRUNGATTUKOTTAI, SRIPERUMBUDURTALUK KANCHEEPURAM DIST. PIN: 602 117. VS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU-2, CHENNAI.. PAN: AAACH 2364M ( ) /APPELLANT) ( *+) /RESPONDENT) ). / APPELLANT BY : MR.SRIRAM SESHADRI, CA *+). /RESPONDENT BY : MRS. R.ANITA, ADDL.CIT .5 /DATE OF HEARING : 24.09.2021 .5 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.09.2021 / O R D E R PER G.MANJUNATHA, AM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ABOVE TWO MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS AGAINST ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN S.P. NOS. 11/CHNY/2020 & 154/CHNY/2020 IN ITA NO.3192/CHNY/2 017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 AND IN S.P.NOS. 10/CHNY/202 0 & 155/CHNY/2020 IN IT(TP)A NO.70/CHNY/2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 IN M.P NOS.7 & 8 RESPECTIVE LY. 2 MISC.PETITION NOS. 7 & 8/CHNY/20 21 2. INSOFAR AS M.P.NO.7/CHNY/2021 IS CONCERNED, THE APPEAL ITSELF FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 HAS ALREADY BE EN DISPOSED OFF BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 01.09.2021 AND HENCE, THE M.P NO.7/CHNY/2021 HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND THUS , SAME IS DISMISSED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE IS NOT PRESSING THE MISC.PETITION NO.8 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND REQUESTED THAT SAME MAY BE DISMIS SED AS WITHDRAWN. THE LEARNED DR HAS NO OBJECTION FOR TH E SAME. 4. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, BOTH THESE MISCELLAN EOUS PETITIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED AC CORDINGLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . ) (V.DURGA RAO) (G.MANJUNATHA) 9 ; / JUDICIAL MEMBER ; / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 9 /CHENNAI, = / DATED 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 DS . *AB CB /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. D () /CIT(A) 4. D /CIT 5. B *G /DR 6. /GF .