THE JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. M/S. A B ENGINEERING , VADODARA

PDF · subscribers
ITSSA 5/AHD/2022Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 July 2023AY 2009-102 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the submission made by the Revenue's representative. The representative stated that the Revenue did not wish to press the appeal because a duplicate appeal had already been filed. Consequently, the Revenue requested that the appeal be treated as withdrawn. In light of this submission, the Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the original penalty order or the CIT(A)'s decision.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the JCIT(OSD), filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad Bench, against an order dated 06.12.2013 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Ahmedabad. This order arose from a penalty order dated 28.12.2011, which was passed by the ACIT, Central Range, Baroda, under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2009-10 and concerns the assessee M/s. A B Engineering. The dispute involves a penalty imposed on the assessee.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable, given that a duplicate appeal has been filed. Contentions: Assessee: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue: The Ld. Representative for the Revenue submitted that they do not wish to press the appeal as a duplicate appeal has been filed, and therefore, the appeal may be treated as withdrawn.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA&

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील (SS) सं./I.T(SS).A. No. 5/Ahd/2022 (�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2009-10) The JCIT(OSD) M/s. A B Engineering बनाम/ Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara 359-2/360-2, GIDC Vs. Industrial Estate, Makarpur, Vadodara, Gujarat 391110 �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAOFA6709Q .. (अपीलाथ� /Appellant) (��यथ� / Respondent) Shri Praveen Verma, Sr. DR अपीलाथ� ओर से /Appellant by : ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Parin S Shah, A.R. सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of 03/07/2023 Hearing घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of 05/07/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 06.12.2013 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- IV, Ahmedabad arising out of the penalty order dated 28.12.2011 passed by the ACIT, Central Range, Baroda under Section 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2009-10.

IT(SS)A No. 5/Ahd/2022 (JCIT(OSD) vs. M/s. A B Engineering) A.Y.– 2009-10 - 2 - 2. At the time of hearing of the instant appeal, the Ld. Representative appearing for the Revenue submitted before us that he does not want to press this appeal, since a duplicate appeal has been filed. Thus, the appeal may be treated as withdrawn. In that view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 3. In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

This Order pronounced on 05/07/2023

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 05/07/2023 True Copy S. K. SINHA आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →