S. RAMASWAMY,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 7, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3841/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2018AY 1989-903 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following the consistent view taken in the assessee's own cases for other assessment years, set aside the CIT(A)'s order. All issues were restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination after providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a member of the Madras Stock Exchange and proprietor of M/s. Excel & Company, was declared a notified entity after the Harshad Mehta Security Scam. Following search operations, substantial additions were made to his income for the assessment year 1989-90.

What were the issues?

Whether the issues contested in the present appeals should be restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination, in line with previous Tribunal decisions for other assessment years.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H” Bench, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Bharatkumar
For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande
Hearing: 3.5.2018Pronounced: 3.5.2018

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No. 3841/Mum/2016
I.T.A. No. 3846/Mum/2016

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

O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran (AM) :-

These cross appeals are directed against the order dated 31.3.2016 passed by the learned CIT(A)-52, Mumbai and they relate to A.Y. 1989-90.

2.

Learned AR submitted that the assessee was a Member of Madras Stock Exchange and Proprietor of M/s. Excel & Company. He submitted that the assessee was declared as notified entity after Harshad Mehata Security Scam of 1992. He submitted that the assessee was subjected to search operations and consequent thereto, the assessment was completed for the year under consideration making huge additions. He submitted that the appeals pertaining to earlier years came before the Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal and the Tribunal has restored all these issues to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining them afresh. In support of the same, the assessee produced copies of the following orders: (a) dated 22.2.2017 for AY. 1994-95 (b) ITA Nos. 3372 to 3377/Mum/2014 dated 9.6.2017 for A.Ys. 1995-96 to 2000-01 & 2003-04.

(c) & 3380/Mum/2014 dated 27.9.2017 relating to A.Y. 2004-5 & 2009-10.

Accordingly, the learned AR prayed that the issues contested in the present appeals may also be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Learned DR did not object to the plea put forth by learned AR.

3.

Having regard to the rival submissions and consistent with the view taken by the Coordinate Benches in assessee’s own case in other years in the appeals referred supra, we set aside order passed by the learned CIT(A) for the year under consideration and restore all the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining them afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

4.

In the result, the cross appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order has been pronounced in the Court on 3.5.2018.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →