9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 586X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tant. What is important is that, with or without arguments, the Tribunal has not disposed of aspects of deletions by the CIT(A) on merits. In plain terms, without reversing CIT(A)'s order in this respect, the Tribunal could not have allowed the Revenue's appeal. The Assessee had not got any answer from the Tribunal, regarding the justification of the additions made by the Assessing Officer, on which, the Assessee had succeeded in Appeal before the CIT(A). Under the circumstances, the question is answered in favour of the Assessee. The Judgment of the Tribunal is set aside. Respondent's appeal is revived and restored to the Tribunal for consideration of the merits of the additions which were deleted by the CIT(A). - INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal by order dated 14th February, 2013, in which, he held that, the reassessment proceedings were invalid. Even on merits, he held that, the Assessing Officer was not justified. In this respect, he made following observations: Even on merit, there is no case for the Assessing Officer because the issue of allowability of depreciation has been considered by the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai 'E' Bench in the appellants own case vide ITA No.231/Mum/2011 of A. Y. 2007-08 order dated 31.5.2011. Of course, that case was in respect of 271(1)(c) but in Para 4, Hon'ble ITAT has discussed the facts of case where assets were not put to use but case where assets were ready to use and assessee could not commence commercial production due to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rging before the Tribunal, that notice of reassessment was issued at the behest of audit report, Assessee also urged that in any case, no hearing on merits had taken place. The Tribunal rejected the rectification application, primarily reiterating its finding in its original order, pertaining to validity of reassessment. Thereupon, Assessee has filed this appeal. 4. From the record, it clearly emerges that the CIT(A) had allowed the appeal of the Assessee on both grounds. The CIT(A) did not stop at declaring the reassessment proceedings is invalid. We have reproduced the relevant portion of the CIT(A)'s order, in which, the CIT(A) has discussed the merit of the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) was of the opinion t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowed the Revenue's appeal. The Assessee had not got any answer from the Tribunal, regarding the justification of the additions made by the Assessing Officer, on which, the Assessee had succeeded in Appeal before the CIT(A). 6. Under the circumstances, the question is answered in favour of the Assessee. The Judgment of the Tribunal is set aside. Respondent's appeal is revived and restored to the Tribunal for consideration of the merits of the additions which were deleted by the CIT(A). 7. Before closing, we may, however, record that, learned Counsel for the Appellant had argued that Revenue's Appeal before the Tribunal was confined to the question of legality of the reassessment proceedings. We, however, do not agree with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
