LINKLATERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 3(1)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6608/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 January 2020AY 2011-122 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the appeal had become academic and infructuous due to the recall of the co-ordinate bench's order. The dismissal of the appeal would not have any bearing on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an order giving effect to a previous tribunal order. However, the previous tribunal order that formed the basis of the impugned proceedings was subsequently recalled.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal is maintainable when the underlying order giving rise to the appeal has been recalled, rendering the appeal infructuous.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(13)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “I” BENCH, MUMBAI

1.

By way of this appeal, the assessee-appellant has challenged the correctness of the Assessing Officer’s order dated 11.09.2017, giving effect to a co-ordinate bench’s order dated 31.01.2007, in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2011-12.

2.

When this appeal was taken up for hearing, it was noticed that the very co-ordinate bench order, to which effect was given in the impugned proceedings, has been recalled on Assessment Year: 2011-12. Page 2 of 3 12.03.2018. The issues raised in this appeal, therefore, are rendered wholly academic and infructuous.

3.

The learned counsel for the assessee however submits that there are certain issues raised as a result of the set aside proceedings and the dismissal of this appeal should not be taken as having impact on by dismissal of this appeal. The ld. DR submits that these apprehensions are without basis.

4.

We do not think that such apprehensions of the learned counsel are justified. This appeal is dismissed as infructious on account of subsequent developments, and it cannot have any bearing on the merits. Yet, to set the controversy on rest, we take this position to record, and leave it at that.

More judgments on Section 144C(13)

All 3,426 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(13) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →