NATIONAL JEWELLERS,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 14(2), MUMBAI

O R D ER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM : This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Ld. CIT(A)- 25, Mumbai in Appeal No. CIT(A)-25/IT-83/DC14(2)/2012-13 dt. 01/10/2013.

Assessment was framed by DCIT 14(2), Mumbai for the AY 2007-08 vide his order dt. 31/10/2012, under section 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

Thereafter on the basis of orders passed under section 263, assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed by the ITO on 31/10/2012 thereby making addition.

3. Aggrieved by the order of AO the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) after considering the case of both the parties the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of Assessing Officer passed under section 143 (3) r.w.s 263 of the Income Tax Act

4. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) the assessee has preferred appeal before us on the following grounds:

1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in disallowing Rs. 30,79,230/- as bad debts & the learned CIT Appeal erred in confirming the same.

2. The Learned Assessing Officer fail to consider the fact that the deduction could alternative be allowed as business loss u/s 37(1) & the CIT Appeal erred in confirming the same.

5. At the very outset the Ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee and submitted an application dt. 27/07/2016, the contents of which is reproduced below:

Hon'ble Sir Ref- w.r.t m/s National Jewellers for A.Y. 2007-08 Sub: Application FOR FILING Appellate order. The above appeal has been fixed before the Hon'ble bench on 28/07/2016. In this connection, it is respectfully submitted that the above appeal has been arising out of Assessment order U/S 143(3) passed n pursuance the Ld. CIT 263 order and since the order u/s 263 has already been quashed by the Hon'ble B Bench vide ITA No. 3633/2012 vide order dt. 03/02/2016, copy of the order are being enclosed. Therefore, it is requested that in view of I.T.A.T. order, the Assessment order U/S 143(3) / 263 may also please be quashed. It is therefore, humbly prayed that the above appeal may kindly be allowed by quashing the order u/s 143(3)/263 in the interest of justice. Prayed Accordingly,

Yours faithfully, For on behalf of M/s National Jewellers Through

V.K. Tulsian, FCA (A/R) Sd/- Minita Jain, ACA, (Assistant to A/R) Place : Mumbai (camp) Date: 27/07/2016 Enclosed: copy of ITAT ORDER The above application is also annexed with the copy of the order passed by Hon'ble I.T.A.T. Mumbai Bench. We have gone through the order passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal and considering the orders of I.T.A.T.; and while taking into consideration the contents of the application we hold that the present appeal filed by the assessee has become in fructuous. In view of the fact that the order under section 263 has already been quashed by Hon'ble ‘B‘ Bench in vide order dt.

03/02/2016. Therefore, in view of the aforementioned legal position we dismiss the present appeal as in fructuous.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21 September, 2016.

Sd/- Sd/- (R.C. SHARMA) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 21/09/2016 AG (On Tour)

Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai

Initial Dictation pad attached Date

28/07/2016 2. Draft placed before author Sr.PS

6. Date of pronouncement 21/09/2016 Sr.PS