9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 561X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he order passed by the A.O. was quashed by the CESTAT. The contention of appellant that the appellate authorities should have decided the matter independently on merits, is noted to be rejected, as the additions u/s 147 were made on the basis of value of imports determined by the AO. The Income Tax Department had not done any investigation or held an inquiry. There was no other material except the value determined by the AO, consequently, setting aside the order of the AO had ramification on the proceedings initiated under the Act. Tribunal considering the pendency of customs appeal before this Court, granted liberty to the appellant for passing fresh order, in case of acceptance of custom appeal. The relevant part of the order of the Tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons being made. The respondent succeeded before the Commissioner, Income Tax (Appeal) and the appeal was allowed vide order dated 24.11.2022. On dismissal of revenue appeal by Tribunal, the present appeal is filed. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Appellate Authorities ought to have decided the matter on merits rather than relying upon the fact that the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short CESTAT ), had allowed the appeal and deleted the additions under the Customs Act, 1962. Contention is that the Tribunal erred in recording that revenue is in appeal before this Court whereas, appeal of the Customs Authorities is pending. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent defends the impugned order. Submiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led by Income Tax Department? 4. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. ITAT has erred by passing the impugned order without recording independent findings on fact of the present case? 7. The proceedings under Section 148 of the Act were initiated on the basis of the information received from DRI. The additions were made solely relying upon the order passed by the A.O. determining the value of the goods imported. It is an undisputed fact that the order passed by the A.O. was quashed by the CESTAT. 8. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the appellate authorities should have decided the matter independently on merits, is noted to be rejected, as the additions under Section 147 of the Act were m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
