ACIT- 17(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJRANGLAL BHIKARAM MITTAL, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7525/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 February 2020AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since a view had already been taken in the assessee's appeal on the same issue, the Revenue's appeal was to be dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an order granting relief on account of alleged bogus purchases. The assessee filed cross-objections, arguing the appeal was functus officio as the Tribunal had already decided a similar issue in the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable when the Tribunal has already adjudicated the same issue in the assessee's appeal for the same assessment year.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Dr. Y.P.Trivedi (Sr. Advocate) &, Ms. Usha Dalal – Ld. AR
For Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik-Ld. DR

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.7525/Mum/2018
Co No.251/Mum/2019

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

1 Aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2010-11 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals)-55, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT(A)-55/ACIT-17(1)/IT-450/17-18 dated 23/08/2018 qua certain relief on account of alleged bogus purchases.

1.

2 The assessee, upon receipt of notice of hearing, has filed cross- objections against the same, inter-alia, on the ground that since the assessee’s appeal on same issue has already been adjudicated by the Tribunal, the present appeal has become functus officio. The assessee has also pleaded that the revenue’s appeal is liable to be dismissed in terms of low tax effect circular issued by CBDT on 08/08/2019. 1.3 A delay of 5 days has been noted in assessee’s cross-objections, the condonation of which has sought by the assessee on the strength of condonation petition dated 22/11/2019 which is accompanied by the affidavit of the assessee. The delay has been attributed to ill-health of the assessee. Keeping in view the quantum of delay, the bench formed an opinion that the delay was to be condoned and the matter was to be proceeded with on merits.

2.

The Ld. Sr. Advocate, drawing our attention to the grounds of cross-objections, placed on record the decision of this Tribunal in assessee’s appeal ITA No.5522/M/2018 for AY 2010-11, common order dated 30/04/2019 wherein the Tribunal has reduced the estimated additions to 4% and allowed partial relief to the assessee. In the above

ITA No.7525/Mum/2018 & Co No.251/Mum/2019 Bajranglal Bhikaram Mittal Assessment Year :2010-11 background, it was submitted that since a view has already been taken by the bench in the matter, the revenue’s appeal is liable to be dismissed. The Ld. DR could not controvert the position that the matter of estimation has already been delved upon by the Tribunal in assessee’s appeal.

3.

In view of the admitted position, since a view has already been taken by the Tribunal in the matter, we dismiss the revenue’s appeal. Resultantly, the other plea that the revenue’s appeal is covered by low tax effect circular issued by CBDT would become infructuous. The cross- objections stand partly allowed.

4.

Finally, the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed whereas the assessee’s cross-objections stand partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 05th February, 2020. (Mahavir Singh) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) उपा"" / Vice President लेखा सद" / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; िदनांक Dated : 05/02/2020 Sr.PS, Jaisy Varghese आदेशकी"ितिलिपअ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ"/ The Appellant

1.

""थ"/ The Respondent 2. आयकरआयु"(अपील) / The CIT(A) 3. आयकरआयु"/ CIT– concerned 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, मुंबई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड"फाईल / Guard File 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →