2023 (8) TMI 1082 - HC - Income Tax

Appeal on substantive addition as pending adjudication before ITAT - as contended additions made on protective basis which were the subject matter of the appeal before the Tribunal could have been kept pending instead of being closed. HELD THAT - According to us, that was one alternative. The other alternative was, which is what the Tribunal has done, to dispose of the appeal with a caveat that in the event of any deletion in the hands of Mr P.K. Jindal wherein substantial additions were made, the appellant/revenue will have liberty to take further steps against the respondent/assessee in accordance with law. According to us, this would mean that if the appellant/revenue were to fail in the matter concerning substantive additions, it would have leave to reopen the appeal pending before the Tribunal.The above-captioned appeals are, thus, closed.

Summary

Issues involved: Application for condonation of delay in filing appeals, disposal of appeals concerning Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14.

Condonation of Delay:
The appellant/revenue filed applications seeking condonation of a 38-day delay in filing the appeals. The court, considering the nature of the delay, decided to condone the delay and allowed the applications subject to exceptions. The applications were disposed of accordingly.

Appeals Concerning Assessment Years:
The appeals pertained to Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 and AY 2013-14. The appellant/revenue aimed to challenge a common order dated 14.12.2022 through these appeals. It was noted that while the appeal regarding substantive addition was pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the additions made on a protective basis against the respondent/assessee were also part of the appeal. The Tribunal decided to dispose of the appeal with a provision that in case of any deletion of substantial additions, the appellant/revenue would have the liberty to take further legal steps against the respondent/assessee. This approach allowed the appellant/revenue to reopen the appeal pending before the Tribunal if they were unsuccessful in the matter concerning substantive additions. The appeals were closed, and orders were to be dispatched to the respondent/assessee through various modes, including email. The appellant/revenue was granted permission to serve a copy of the order on the respondent/assessee, and parties were instructed to act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.