9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 594X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that it falls under the category of Artificial Juridical Person. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, to alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing." 2. The facts narrated by the Revenue are not disputed by both the parties, hence, need not to repeat the same here for the sake of brevity 3. In this case a Notice was sent to the assessee on the address given by it, however, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment is filed. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served to adjourn the case again and again. Therefore, we are deciding the Appeal, exparte qua assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records available on reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ffective manner. Further, the same resolution it has been mentioned that safety council will be assisted by a safety directorate and thus the Oil Industry Safety Directorate has been created. 3. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas vide its Resolution No. 13013/4/84-0R-I dated 10.1.986 had set up the Oil Industry Safety Directorate with the following functions and responsibilities. a) Oversee the implementation of all the decisions of the safety council. b) Keep abreast of the latest design and operating practices in the area of safety and fire fighting in the hydrocarbon processing industry in the developed countries, so as to develop standards and codes that would be suitable for the conditions in India. c) Liase with the statutory o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nment. Hence it is not liable for any tax; 5. The assigning officer had on his own had changed the status of the appellant from AJP to AOP. This legally he cannot do it and the entire assessment is wrong and bad in law. It is liable to be annulled. ON the similar ground, the Hon'ble CIT(A) in appeal No.333/2007-08 vide order dated 19th March 2012 for the A. Y 2004-05 had allowed the contention of the appellant and this issue is squarely covered by the order of the CIT(A).6. Assuming while denying the fact that the Appellant is subject to tax, the Appellant had received during the year under Appeal, grant from OIDB to the extent of Rs. 6,95,00,000/-. This is basically a capital grant as per the directions of the government and accordingl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out unilaterally by the assessing officer without giving proper explanation and opportunity. The assessment done in status other than filed by the appellant is null and void. 4. On the similar facts for the assessment year 2004-05 in the case of the appellant, the Hon'ble CIT(A) in appeal No.333/2007-08 vide order dated 19.03.2012 had accepted the similar contention. Copy of the order had already been given for your records. In view of the foregoing facts, the assessment framed u/s.143(3} in the status of AOP may kindly be annulled." 3.2 I have gone through the findings of the AO in the assessment order and written submission of the Ld.AR. Similar issue was also involved in A.Y.2004-05 which has been decided by me in favour of the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
