If on Revenues appeal tribunal restored the matter to the AO than assesses appeal has become infructuous

Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Brief :
The grounds raised read as under: “(i) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order u/s. 154 even though there was no error apparent from the record. (ii) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in disallowing the deduction u/s 80IB in respect of purported export incentives even though assessee was supporting manufacturer. (iii) That in any case and any view of the matter, action of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in passing the impugned order u/s. 154 and disallowing the claim u/s. 80IB in respect of purported export incentives in bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case.

Citation :
M/s Mittal Overseas,C/o M/s RRA TaxIndia,D-28, South Extension,Part-I, New Delhi – 110049 (PAN: AAFFM1985R)(Appellant) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,Panipat Circle, Panipat (Respondent)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

DELHI BENCH “E” NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

AND

SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

I.T.A. No. 5847/Del/2011

A.Y.: 2002-03

M/s Mittal Overseas,

C/o M/s RRA TaxIndia,

D-28, South Extension,

Part-I, New Delhi – 110049

(PAN: AAFFM1985R)

(Appellant)

Vs.

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,

Panipat Circle, Panipat

(Respondent)

Assessee by: Sh. Tarun Kumar, Adv.

Department by: S h. R.S. Negi, Sr. D.R.

ORDER

PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM

This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 12.10.2010 pertaining to assessment year 2002-03.

2. The grounds raised read as under:

“(i) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order u/s. 154 even though there was no error apparent from the record.

(ii) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in disallowing the deduction u/s 80IB in respect of purported export incentives even though assessee was supporting manufacturer.

(iii) That in any case and any view of the matter, action of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in passing the impugned order u/s. 154 and disallowing the claim u/s. 80IB in respect of purported export incentives in bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case.

(iv) That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other.”

3. At the threshold, in this case, ld. counsel of the assessee submitted in this regard that assessee’s appeal has become infructuous. It was pointed out that in revenue’s appeal for the same year the tribunal had set aside the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and restored the order of the Assessing Officer and thus allowed the Revenue’s appeal. In this view of the matter, ld. counsel of the assessee conceded that the assessee’s appeal has become infructuous.

4. We have carefully considered the submissions. We find that assessee’s appeal has become infructuous and the same is dismissed as such.

5. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29/2/2012, upon conclusion of hearing.

Sd/- Sd/-

[A.D. JAIN] [SHAMIM YAHYA]

JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Date 29/2/2012

“SRBHATNAGAR”

Copy forwarded to: -

1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A)

5. DR, ITAT

TRUE COPY