COBALT POWER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 60/HYD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 February 2021AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the substantive assessment was remitted, the protective assessment in the assessee's case also needed to be remitted back to the AO for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal arose from a protective assessment. The substantive assessment in another entity's case was remitted back to the AO for de-novo consideration by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether a protective assessment needs to be remitted when the substantive assessment it relates to is remitted for de-novo consideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY & SHRI S.S. GODARA

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu
For Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR
Hearing: 08/02/2021Pronounced: 25/02/2021

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year:2010-11 M/s. Cobalt Power Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-1(4), Hyderabad – 500 016. Hyderabad. PAN: AADCC 3347 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri H. Srinivasulu Revenue by: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 08/02/2021 Date of pronouncement: 25/02/2021 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT (A)-1, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0108/CIT(A)-1, Hyderabad/2016- 17/2018-19, dated 27/09/2018 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 and U/s. 250(6) of the Act for the AY 2010-11.

2.

The assessee has raised several grounds in its appeal.

3.

At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted before us that this appeal of the assessee is arising from the protective assessment made in the hands of the assessee by the ld. AO. The Ld. AR further submitted that the substantive assessment made in the hands of the other entity viz., M/s. East Coast Energy Private Limited was remitted back to the file of Ld. AO for de-novo consideration by the Tribunal. At this juncture, the Bench opined that since the substantive assessment made in the hands of M/s. East Coast Energy Private Limited is remitted back to the file of the ld. AO for de-novo consideration by the Tribunal, the protective assessment made in the case of the assessee is also required to be remitted back to the file of the Ld. AO. The Ld. DR conceded to the view expressed by the Bench though the Ld. AR vehemently argued that the appeal has to be heard on merits.

4.

After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that since the substantive addition in the hands of M/s. East Coast Energy Private Limited is remitted back to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo consideration, the case of the assessee which is only a protective assessment has also to be necessarily remitted back to the file of the ld. AO because the outcome of the appeals is inter-connected. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the appeal of the assessee is remitted back to the file of the Ld. AO in order to pass appropriate order based on law and merit after considering the assessment order passed in the case of M/s. East Coast Energy Private Limited wherein substantive addition is made. It is ordered accordingly.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above.

Pronounced in the open Court on the Twenty Fifth of February, 2021.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →