Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Kanpur V. M/s Trade Stone Ltd., Kanpur

MA 8/LKW/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4522 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

M.A. NO.08/LKO/16 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI P. K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO.08/LKW/2016 (IN I.T.A. NO.215/LKW/2012) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07 A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-5, KANPUR. VS. M/S TREAD STONE LTD., 39, FACTORY AREA, FAZALGANJ, KANPUR. PAN:AAACL2544H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER P. K. BANSAL, A.M.: THIS MISC. APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENU E AGAINST THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 18/12/2014 PASSED IN I.T.A. NO.215/LKW/2012. 2. LEARNED D. R. BY REFERRING TO THE MISC. APPLICAT ION CONTENDED BEFORE US THAT THERE HAD BEEN MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD A S ADDITIONAL GROUND TAKEN BY THE REVENUE HAS NOT BEEN ADJUDICATED BY TH IS TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL. DURING THE COURSE OF HEAR ING OF THE MISC. APPLICATION, WE ASKED THE LEARNED D. R. TO SUBMIT T HE COPY OF ADDITIONAL GROUND AND THE PROOF FOR FILING THE SAME. LEARNED D. R. WAS FAIR ENOUGH THAT IN THIS CASE THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS WERE RECEI VED BY LEARNED D. R. IN HIS OFFICE FROM THE OFFICE OF DCIT, KANPUR ON 23/12 /2014 AND THEREFORE, HE WAS FAIR ENOUGH TO CONCEDE THAT THE ADDITIONAL GROU NDS MUST HAVE BEEN APPELLANT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM, D.R. RESPONDENT BY SHRI RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING 27/05/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 08 / 06 /2016 M.A. NO.08/LKO/16 2 FILED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ONLY AFTER PASSING OF TH E ORDER DATED 18/12/2014. LEARNED D. R. WAS NOT ABLE TO SUBMIT THE EVIDENCE O F FILING THE ADDITIONAL GROUND BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THR OUGH THE FILE OF I.T.A. NO.215/LKW/2012. FROM THE SAID FILE WE DO NOT ANY ADDITIONAL GROUND BEING FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL BY THE TRIBUNAL. THIS IS FACT THAT NO ADDITIONAL GROUND H AS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL BEFORE THE DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL BY THIS TRIBUNAL. THE TRIBUNAL HAS PASSED THE ORDER ON 18/ 12/2014 WHILE THE CASE WAS CONCLUDED ON 05/11/2015. LEARNED D. R. CONCED ED BEFORE US THAT THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS WERE RECEIVED IN THEIR OFFICE ON 23/12/2014. IN VIEW OF THE SAID FACT, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT APPARENT ON RECORD OF NON ADJUDICATING THE ADDITIONAL GROUND IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL. WE ACCORDINGLY DISMISS THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE REVE NUE IS DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT DURING THE COU RSE OF HEARING) SD/. SD/. ( MAHAVIR PRASAD ) ( P. K. BANSAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:08/06/2016 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., ALLAHABAD ASSTT. REGISTR AR