INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2), KALYAN, MUMBAI vs. M/S. TRIMURTI ENTERPRISES , MUMBAI

The Revenue in appeal has assailed the order of CIT(A) by raising following grounds:

1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in not appreciating the fact that the assessee is the deemed owner of the property u/s. 27(iiia) and 27(iiib) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Shri Dharan Gandhi appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted at the outset that CIT(A) has allowed the appeal of assessee on the legal ground holding reopening of assessment u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ in short ‘ the Act’] unsustainable, as it is based on change of opinion. The Revenue has not challenged the order of CIT(A) in granting relief to the assessee /respondent on the legal issue. The CIT(A) has dismissed the grounds raised by the assessee on merits as infructuous.

Per contra, Ms. Beena Santosh representing the Department prayed for upholding the additions made in the assessment order.

Both sides heard. A bare perusal of the impugned order shows that the CIT(A) has allowed appeal of assessee on the legal ground challenging reopening of assessment u/s. 147 of the Act. The CIT(A) held that reopening is based on change of opinion and hence, not sustainable. On merits of the addition the CIT(A) has dismissed the grounds as having become infructuous. The revenue in present appeal has assailed the order of CIT(A) on merits of the addition. No ground has been raised by Department challenging the findings of CIT(A) on reopening of assessment u/s.147 of the Act. The grounds of appeal by Revenue are absolutely misconceived and misdirected. Consequently, the appeal by Revenue is dismissed.