DCIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S. MICRO MANAGEMENT LTD., KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4677/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 February 2017AY 2009-103 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was defective and not maintainable in law. The appeal was dismissed due to non-compliance with procedural requirements.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting additions made by the AO. The appeal was repeatedly adjourned for the Revenue to amend its defective grounds of appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the Revenue's appeal due to defective grounds. The substantive issues related to disallowance under Section 14A and loss on shares under Section 73 were not adjudicated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 73

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU

Department by : Ms. Bedobina Chaudhuri, Sr. DR Assessee by : Sh. R.S. Ahuja, FCA ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER The Revenue has filed this Appeal against the Order dated 14.8.2013 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Kolkata relevant to assessment year 2009-10 on the following proposed ground:-

“Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 9,66,315/- made by the AO on account of disallowance u/s. 14A calculated as per separate sheet and restricted upto quantum of expenses of the P&L account and addition of Rs. 35,29,877/- on account of disallowance of loss on shares virtue of explanation to section 73.”

2.

After perusing the ground raised by the Revenue, I find that the Department has raised proposed ground of appeal signed by the DCIT, Central Circle-I, Faridabad which is not as per Rules. I note that this appeal earlier came up for hearing before the Bench on 23.6.2016 and 17.8.2016 and adjourned on the request of the assessee. On 4.10.2016 the Bench pointed out the defect to the Ld. DR and directed to amend the ground of appeal and 1 accordingly, the case was adjourned for 17.11.2016. On 17.11.2016 the Department did not comply with the direction given by the Bench on 04.10.2016 and again requested for adjournment and accordingly, the Bench adjourned the case for 21.12.2016 and granted last opportunity to the Ld. DR to file the amended ground of appeal, as per rules. But Department did not do the needful on 21.12.2016 and even on 15.2.2017 i.e. today.

3.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee raised the objection on the action of the Department.

4.

Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the Appeal is defective and is not maintainable in the eyes of law, hence, I dismiss the present appeal filed by the Revenue, being ‘Defective’. But in the interest of justice, I am are giving the liberty to the Revenue to file the Application for recall of this order, as per Rules, after rectifying the defect.

6.

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 15/02/2017.

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →