ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. SH. OPINDER MEHTANI, FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1217/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 June 2016AY 2005-062 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 noted that the department's appeal was against the original assessment order and not the CIT(A)'s order on the rectification. The department failed to rectify the mistake in its appeal form despite directions.

What were the facts?

The department filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessment order was initially passed under Section 143(3) and later rectified under Section 154. The department's appeal was based on the original assessment order.

What were the issues?

Whether the department's appeal was properly filed against the correct order and with proper grounds. The procedural defect in filing the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI

Hearing: 01.06.2016Pronounced: 03.06.2016

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Smt. Beena Pillai, JM Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Asstt. Commissioner of Income Vs Sh. Opinder Mehtani, Tax, Circle-I, Block-B, CGO Prop. M/s Opinder Mehtani Complex, NH-IV, Faridabad Works, H.No. 384, Sector-55, Now C/o M/s Imperial Auto Industries, Plot No. 94, Sector-25, Faridabad (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AQJPM7922A Assessee by : Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01.06.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 03.06.2016 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM:

This is an appeal by the department against the order dated 24.12.2012 of ld. CIT(A), Faridabad. In the present case, it is noticed that the department in Form No. 36 has mentioned that the assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) wherein the income assessed was at Rs.8,45,000/- against the returned income of Rs.6,57,050/-. It is noticed that the said assessment order was later on rectified by the AO vide order dated 26.09.2011. The department has not Opinder Mehtani filed the grounds in its appeal only recommendation of the ld. CIT, Faridabad has been furnished.

2.

In the present case, it appears from perusal of the Form No. 36 that the grievance of the department is against the original assessment order and not against the order of the ld. CIT(A) passed on appeal of the assessee on the subsequent order u/s 154 of the Act. The mistake has not been rectified by the department even when it was directed on the occasion of the earlier hearing on 09.03.2016. Therefore, this appeal deserves to be dismissed with the rider that whenever the correct Form No. 36 is furnished and the relevant grounds are raised along with the application for recalling of the order in accordance with law, it may be restored.

3.

In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 03/06/2016)

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →