Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue filed three appeals concerning assessment years 2007-08, 2009-10, and 2010-11 against the assessee, Sh. Ram Gopal Garg. The Assessing Officer had made 'protective' additions under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A. The CIT(A) had noted that substantive additions were made in the case of Shri Ramesh Chand Garg, which were settled before the Income Tax Settlement Commission.
Held
The Revenue sought an adjournment for these old appeals. The Tribunal noted that the crucial fact of substantive additions being settled earlier was not denied by the Revenue. Therefore, the Tribunal declined the adjournment and decided to proceed with the appeals.
Key Issues
Whether the Revenue's appeals, filed against 'protective' additions when substantive additions were settled, should be dismissed due to lack of grounds and seeking adjournment.
Sections Cited
143(3), 153A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
Sr. No. Appeal No. A. Y. Revenue Assessee Order appealed against Proceedings u/s 1. 113/Agr/2014 2007-08 ACIT Sh. Ram CIT(Appeals), Gwalior, in 143(3)/153A Gopal Garg case No. 612/IT/11- 12/Gwl, Dated 11.02.2014 2 164/Agr/2014 2009-10 ACIT Sh. Ram CIT(Appeals), Gwalior, in 143(3)/153A Gopal Garg case No. 677/IT/11- 12/Gwl, Dated 04.03.2014 3. 165/Agr./2014 2010-11 ACIT Sh. Ram CIT(Appeals), Gwalior, in 143(3) Gopal Garg case No. 676/IT/11- 12/Gwl, Dated 04.03.2014
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
164 & 165/Agr/014 Sh. Ram Gopal Garg 3. It emerges during the course of hearing that the learned CIT-DR has filed a letter today seeking en-block adjournment even in these old appeals of the year 2014 involving “protective” additions made by the Assessing Officer in his assessment(s) framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act.
Faced with the situation, we note that the able assistance coming from the assessee side that the learned CIT(A) has recorded the clinching identical findings in para 11 of the lower appellate orders under challenge that the corresponding substantive additions had been made in the case Shri Ramesh Chand Garg which stood settled before the Income Tax Settlement Commission way back on 24.06.2013. This clinching fact has nowhere been denied in the Revenue’s identical grounds herein.
That being the case, we note that the Learned CIT(A), DR’s adjournment petition as well these three Revenue’s appeals deserve to be declined in very terms as there is no point in postponing the hearing. We order accordingly.
These Revenue’s three appeals 164 & 165/Agr./2014 are dismissed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order pronounced in the open court on 12.02.2025