Harendra Mohanlal Karia v. ITO, Ward-1, Gandhidham
[Citation -2019-LL-0919-10]

Citation 2019-LL-0919-10
Appellant Name Harendra Mohanlal Karia
Respondent Name ITO, Ward-1, Gandhidham
Court ITAT-Rajkot
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 19/09/2019
Assessment Year 2003-04
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags low tax effect • disallowance of commission • restriction of disallowance • benefit of deduction
Bot Summary: Both the appeals i.e. ITA No.51/RJT/2007 2 206/RJT/2007 at the instance of the Revenue, and the appeal of the assessee i.e. ITA No.51/RJT/2007 were dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 13.2.2009. Dissatisfied with the order of the Tribunal, Revenue went in appeal before the Hon ble High Court vide Tax Appeal No.2269 of 2009. Hon ble High Court has set aside order of the Tribunal and restored the appeal of the Revenue for re-adjudication. Since the assessee accepted order of the Tribunal and did not go to the Hon ble High Court, therefore order of the Tribunal qua the issue involved in the assessee s appeal attained finality. The proceedings will travel to the Tribunal to the extent that were subject matter before the Hon ble High Court. Once the assessee chooses not to file any appeal against order of the Tribunal, it become final the appeal of the assessee has not been restored it becomes infructous and dismissed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.51/RJT/2007 Asstt. Year 2003-04 Harendra Mohanlal Karia ITO, Ward-1 Prop M/s.Link Enterprise Vs. Gandhidham. Plot NO.27, ward-12B Gandhidham. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by Shri Vimal Desai, AR Revenue by Shri Anil Kumar Das, DR Date of Hearing 19/09/2019 Date of Pronouncement 19/09/2019 ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Assessee is in appeal before Tribunal against order of ld.CIT(A)-II, Rajkot dated 04.12.2006 passed for Asstt.Year 2003-04. 2. It is pertinent to note that ld.AO has disallowed commission of Rs.1,04,24,701/-. On appeal ld.CIT(A) has restricted such disallowance to Rs.20,84,940/-. There was another issue vide which deduction under section 80HHC was restricted to Rs.6,84,581/-. Revenue has challenged deletion of disallowance of commission, whereas assessee has challenged confirmation of disallowance of commission at Rs.20,84,940/- and restriction of deduction under section 80HHC at Rs.6,84,581/-. Both appeals i.e. ITA No.51/RJT/2007 2 206/RJT/2007 at instance of Revenue, and appeal of assessee i.e. ITA No.51/RJT/2007 were dismissed by Tribunal vide order dated 13.2.2009. Dissatisfied with order of Tribunal, Revenue went in appeal before Hon ble High Court vide Tax Appeal No.2269 of 2009. Hon ble High Court has set aside order of Tribunal and restored appeal of Revenue for re-adjudication. That appeal stands dismissed on account of low tax effect involved by virtue of recent CBDT Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 8.8.2019. Since assessee accepted order of Tribunal and did not go to Hon ble High Court, therefore order of Tribunal qua issue involved in assessee s appeal attained finality. It could not be construed that part of order has also been remitted back to Tribunal. proceedings will travel to Tribunal to extent that were subject matter before Hon ble High Court. Once assessee chooses not to file any appeal against order of Tribunal, it become final, hence, appeal of assessee has not been restored it becomes infructous and dismissed. 3. In result, appeal of assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in Court on 19th September, 2019 at Rajkot. Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Rajkot; Dated 19/09/2019 Harendra Mohanlal Karia v. ITO, Ward-1, Gandhidham
Report Error