Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 21.03.2018 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2010-11, raising following ground:
KBA Infrastructure P. Ltd. KBA Infrastructure P. Ltd. 2 ITA No. 2543/M/2018 1.1 The Learned Principal Commissioner of Income - tax - 10, The Learned Principal Commissioner of Income The Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Mumbai ["Ld. CIT"], erred in framing the revision order u/s. 2 Mumbai ["Ld. CIT"], erred in framing the revision order u/s. 2 Mumbai ["Ld. CIT"], erred in framing the revision order u/s. 263 of the Income - tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"] by not giving proper, sufficient and tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"] by not giving proper, sufficient and tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"] by not giving proper, sufficient and effective opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. effective opportunity of being heard to the Appellant.
1.2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the order is required to be held case, and in law, the order is required to be held as bad and illegal in as bad and illegal in breach of the principles of natural justice, as well as non breach of the principles of natural justice, as well as non-application of application of mind to the facts and the contentions brought on record by the mind to the facts and the contentions brought on record by the mind to the facts and the contentions brought on record by the Appellant.
WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE
2. REVISION ILLEGAL REVISION ILLEGAL 2.1 The Ld. CIT erred in passing t The Ld. CIT erred in passing the order us. 263 of the Act, he order us. 263 of the Act, revising the assessment order passed by the A.O. u/s. 143 (3) r.w.s. 147 assessment order passed by the A.O. u/s. 143 (3) r.w.s. 147 assessment order passed by the A.O. u/s. 143 (3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act.
2.2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, case, and in law, the order is bad, illegal and void as necessary pre the order is bad, illegal and void as necessary pre - conditions for initiating ditions for initiating the revision proceeding as well as the the revision proceeding as well as the completion thereof were not fulfilled. completion thereof were not fulfilled.
2.3 Without prejudice to the generality of the above, the CIT failed Without prejudice to the generality of the above, the CIT failed Without prejudice to the generality of the above, the CIT failed to appreciate that: that:
(i) The assessment order framed was not "erroneous" within the The assessment order framed was not "erroneous" within the The assessment order framed was not "erroneous" within the meaning of section 263 of the Act; ning of section 263 of the Act;
KBA Infrastructure P. Ltd. KBA Infrastructure P. Ltd. 3 ITA No. 2543/M/2018 (ii) even otherwise, there was no lack of investigation / inquiry and no even otherwise, there was no lack of investigation / inquiry and no even otherwise, there was no lack of investigation / inquiry and no non - application of mind on the part of the A.0. while framing the application of mind on the part of the A.0. while framing the application of mind on the part of the A.0. while framing the assessment order; and assessment order; and (iii) in any case, the assessment order was not "prejudicial in any case, the assessment order was not "prejudicial in any case, the assessment order was not "prejudicial to the interest of the revenue" within the meaning of section 263 of the Act. of the revenue" within the meaning of section 263 of the Act. of the revenue" within the meaning of section 263 of the Act. 2.4 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, case, and in law, no revision u/s. 263 of the Act was called for. no revision u/s. 263 of the Act was called for.
At the outset, the Ld. Counsel of the asse At the outset, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that ssee submitted that in the appellate proceedings in respect of consequent assessment the appellate proceedings in respect of consequent assessment the appellate proceedings in respect of consequent assessment passed under order section 143(3) read with section under order section 143(3) read with section under order section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’), the assessee is confident of assessee is confident of succeeding before the Ld. CIT(A) on succeeding before the Ld. CIT(A) on merit and therefore seeks to merit and therefore seeks to withdraw the appeal with liberty to agitate all grounds in future withdraw the appeal with liberty to agitate all grounds in future withdraw the appeal with liberty to agitate all grounds in future, in case appeal is not decided in favour of the assessee. case appeal is not decided in favour of the assessee. case appeal is not decided in favour of the assessee. The relevant part of his letter dated 24.06.2022 is reproduced as under: part of his letter dated 24.06.2022 is reproduced as under: part of his letter dated 24.06.2022 is reproduced as under:
(iv) However, since the AO ha However, since the AO has not yet prepared the Remand Report, the s not yet prepared the Remand Report, the Appellant seeks liberty of the Hon’ble Tribunal to withdraw the present Appellant seeks liberty of the Hon’ble Tribunal to withdraw the present Appellant seeks liberty of the Hon’ble Tribunal to withdraw the present appeal with a liberty to agitate all grounds in future proceedings and oblige. appeal with a liberty to agitate all grounds in future proceedings and oblige. appeal with a liberty to agitate all grounds in future proceedings and oblige.
KBA Infrastructure P. Ltd. KBA Infrastructure P. Ltd. 4 ITA No. 2543/M/2018
In view of withdraw In view of withdrawal of the appeal by the assessee by the assessee, the same is dismissed as infructuous. However, with a liberty to request for is dismissed as infructuous. However, with a liberty to request for is dismissed as infructuous. However, with a liberty to request for recall of the appeal in case the assessee does not succeed before the recall of the appeal in case the assessee does not succeed before the recall of the appeal in case the assessee does not succeed before the Ld. CIT(A) in appeal against the assessment order consequent to Ld. CIT(A) in appeal against the assessment order consequent to Ld. CIT(A) in appeal against the assessment order consequent to order u/s 263 of the Act. order u/s 263 of the Act.
In the result, the a In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. ppeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.