The appeal emanates from revisional order under sec 263 which struck down by the Tribunal will not survive

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

[BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND

SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER]

I.T.A No. 679/Mds/2010

(Assessment year : 2004-05 )

The Asst. Commissioner of

Income-tax

Company Circle II(4)

Chennai

(Appellant)

Vs

 M/s L&T Western India Toll

Bridge Ltd

Mount Poonamallee Road

Manapakkam, P.B.No.979

Chennai 600 089

[PAN AAACL7084N ]

 (Respondent)

C.O. No. 45/Mds/2010

(Assessment year : 2004-05 )

M/s L&T Western India Toll

Bridge Ltd

Mount Poonamallee Road

Manapakkam, P.B.No.979

Chennai 600 089

(Cross objector)

Vs

The Asst. Commissioner of

Income-tax

Company Circle II(4)

Chennai

 (Respondent)

Department by: Dr.I.Vijayakumar, CIT/DR

Assessee by: Dr.Anita Sumanth, Advocate

Date of Hearing: 29-11-2011

Date of Pronouncement: 12-12-2011

O R D E R

PER HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by the Revenue and the cross objection by the assessee are directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-III, Chennai, dated 20.2.2010.

2. At the time of hearing, it was brought to our notice that this appeal emanates from a revisional order passed u/s 263 of the Act and because the revisionary proceeding itself has been struck down by the Tribunal vide its order dated 17.12.009, this appeal will not survive. A copy of the Tribunal’s order which is passed in I.T.A.No. 857/Mds/2009 has been placed on record for our perusal. After going through this order, we are satisfied that the order which resulted in passing the assessment order from which this appeal is stemmed-up will have no legs to stand as the consequential assessment made has become nonexistent. Accordingly, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed as having become infructuous.

3. As a result, the cross objection which has been filed in respect of the appeal filed by the Revenue will also not survive. But, it was yelled by the ld.AR that merits of the grounds taken in the cross objection should not be washed away permanently and the assessee should be given an opportunity to revive these issues as and when the proceedings, if reversed, by the higher forums. We find that this is not a genuine fear of the ld.AR. We may mention that in case of revival of any order, all the connected matters are also liable to be revived. Therefore, this fear of the ld.AR is unfounded. Accordingly, both appeal as well as the cross objection stand dismissed.

4. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed.

                               Order pronounced in the open court on 12.12.2011.

                                            Sd/-                                         Sd/-

                    (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN)        (HARI OM MARATHA)

                          VICE-PRESIDENT                  JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 12th December, 2011

RD

Copy to:

1. Appellant

2. Respondent

3. CIT(A)

4. CIT

5. DR