BIRENDRA M SHUKLA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 21, MUMBAI

Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य, राजे�� सद�य राजे�� राजे�� केकेकेके अनुसार राजे�� अनुसार अनुसार/ PER Rajendra A.M.- अनुसार Challenging the order dated 23.03.2015 of the CIT(A)-51, Mumbai the assessee has filed the present appeal. Assessee, an individual filed his return of income on 29.01.1997 declaring income of Rs.93,950/- in response to the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act.The Assessing Officer(AO)completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 27.2.2009, determining the income of the assessee at Rs.15.98 lakhs. Brief Facts: 2.An action u/s. 132 of the Act was carried out on 10. 12.1994 in the case of the assessee and the assessment proceedings were initiated for the year 1986 to 1995-96.Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). Before her, the assessee raised an issue of validity of reopening.However, without adjudicating the issue, the FAA decided the appeal in favour of the assessee, in part.

3.During the course of hearing before us the Authorised Representative (AR) stated that the Tribunal had while deciding the appeals for the assessment years 1987-88 1988-89 and 1990-91(ITAs No./3897/mum/2015, 3898 and 3900/Mum/2015 dt.18.8.2015) had sent back the matter to the file of the FAA, as the facts of the earlier and subsequent years were identical to the facts for the year under consideration. The Departmental Representative (DR), left the issue to the discretion of the Bench.

4.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us.We find that while

3899/M/15-Birendra M.Shukla