Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “I ”, MUMBAI
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई पीठ “आई ”, मुंबई पीठ �ी िवकास अव�थी, �याियक सद�य एवं �ी गगन गोयल, लेखाकार सद�य के सम� IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I ”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.646/मुं/2023 (िन.व.2014-15) ITA NO. 646/MUM/2023(A.Y. 2014-15) Ravi Ramakrishnan, 205/404, Khar Rose Minar Building, 4th Floor, 10th Road, Khar (West, Mumbai 400 052 PAN: ANWPR-2793-J ...... अपीलाथ� /Appellant बनाम Vs. International Tax Ward 4(1)(1), Room No.1729, 17th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021. ..... �ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ� �ारा/ Appellant by : Ms. Anushree Gupta �ितवादी �ारा/Respondent by : Shri Anil Sant सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 26/09/2023 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : 26/09/2023 आदेश आदेश/ ORDER आदेश आदेश PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the assessment order dated 10/01/2023 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ in short ‘the Act], for assessment year 2014-15. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds in appeal: “ The following grounds are independent of and without prejudice to one another: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in the law, the final assessment order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer ('Ld. AO') under section 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) / Directions passed by the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ('DRP') under
2 ITA NO. 646/MUM/2023(A.Y. 2014-15) section 144C(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act1) is bad, both in the eye of law and on the facts on account of:
(i) The Hon'ble DRP has erred in completely ignoring and not considering the Appellants submissions made via email dated 7 December 2022, 10 December 2022, and 13 December 2022. (ii) The Hon'ble DRP has erred in not providing an opportunity of being heard. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP has erred in confirming the variation proposed by the Ld. AO amounting to Rs.45,62,270 under section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act as income from other sources and has also erred in invoking the amended provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Act for years prior to AY 2014-15. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP has grossly erred in completely ignoring and not considering the submissions made via email dated 13 December, 2022 wherein the Appellant had submitted the write up for granting corresponding relief in capital gains computation as per section 49(4) of the Act along with relevant case laws.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellant has filed a rectification application dated 26 December 2022 before the Hon'ble DRP on account of Appellants submissions not being considered in the DRP Directions and not providing opportunity of being heard.
The Appellant craves leave to add, to amend, to alter, to withdraw, to modify and / or to substitute any or all the foregoing grounds of appeal and to submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the appeal hearing.” 3. Ms. Anushree Gupta appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted at the outset that the assessee has filed an application before the Dispute Resolution Panel(DRP) under Rule 13 of Income Tax (Dispute Resolution Panel) Rules, 2009 for rectification of the Directions on 23/12/2022. If the aforesaid application is allowed, the present appeal of the assessee would become infructuous. The ld.Authorized Representative of the assessee furnished copy of the said application and prayed that the DRP may be directed to decide rectification application of the assessee.
We have heard the submissions made by both side. The assessee has placed on record copy of application dated 23/12/2022 filed under Rule 13 of
3 ITA NO. 646/MUM/2023(A.Y. 2014-15) Income Tax (Dispute Resolution Panel) Rules, 2009 for rectification of DRP directions. We deem it appropriate to dispose of the appeal with a direction to the DRP to decide the aforesaid application, in accordance with law. The DRP shall decide the said application expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid directions.
Order pronounced in the open court on Tuesday the 26th day of September, 2023.
Sd/- Sd/- (GAGAN GOYAL) (VIKAS AWASTHY) लेखाकार सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई/ Mumbai, �दनांक/Dated 26/09/2023 Vm, Sr. PS(O/S) �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : �ितिलिप �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत 1. अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT 4.. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुबंई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड� फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, Mumbai