SHRI HARENDRA MOHANLAL KARIA (H/C DIRECTION),GANDHIDHAM vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHIDHAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 51/RJT/2007Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 September 2019AY 2003-042 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the assessee did not appeal to the High Court, its part of the order attained finality. The assessee's appeal, having not been restored, was rendered infructuous and dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2003-04 was dismissed by the Tribunal. The Revenue's appeal was set aside by the High Court and restored for re-adjudication, but later dismissed due to low tax effect. The assessee had not appealed the Tribunal's order to the High Court.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal, not having been restored by the High Court, is infructuous. The finality of the Tribunal's order for the assessee when only the Revenue's appeal was remitted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80HHC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, AR
Hearing: 19/09/2019Pronounced: 19/09/2019

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, राजकोट �यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.51/RJT/2007 �नधा�रण वष�/ Asstt. Year: 2003-04 Harendra Mohanlal Karia ITO, Ward-1 Gandhidham. Prop: M/s.Link Enterprise Vs. Plot NO.27, ward-12B Gandhidham. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Shri Vimal Desai, AR Revenue by : Shri Anil Kumar Das, DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 19/09/2019 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement: 19/09/2019 आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against order of ld.CIT(A)-II, Rajkot dated 04.12.2006 passed for the Asstt.Year 2003-04.

2.

It is pertinent to note that the ld.AO has disallowed commission of Rs.1,04,24,701/-. On appeal the ld.CIT(A) has restricted such disallowance to Rs.20,84,940/-. There was another issue vide which deduction under section 80HHC was restricted to Rs.6,84,581/-. The Revenue has challenged deletion of disallowance of commission, whereas the assessee has challenged confirmation of disallowance of commission at Rs.20,84,940/- and restriction of deduction under section 80HHC at Rs.6,84,581/-. Both the appeals i.e.

ITA No.51/RJT/2007 2 206/RJT/2007 at the instance of the Revenue, and the appeal of the assessee i.e. ITA No.51/RJT/2007 were dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 13.2.2009. Dissatisfied with the order of the Tribunal, Revenue went in appeal before the Hon’ble High Court vide Tax Appeal No.2269 of 2009. Hon’ble High Court has set aside order of the Tribunal and restored the appeal of the Revenue for re-adjudication. That appeal stands dismissed on account of low tax effect involved by virtue of recent CBDT Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 8.8.2019. Since the assessee accepted order of the Tribunal and did not go to the Hon’ble High Court, therefore order of the Tribunal qua the issue involved in the assessee’s appeal attained finality. It could not be construed that part of the order has also been remitted back to the Tribunal. The proceedings will travel to the Tribunal to the extent that were subject matter before the Hon’ble High Court. Once the assessee chooses not to file any appeal against order of the Tribunal, it become final, hence, the appeal of the assessee has not been restored; it becomes infructous and dismissed.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Court on 19th September, 2019 at Rajkot.

Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Rajkot; Dated 19/09/2019

More judgments on Section 80HHC

All 1,083 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80HHC →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →