TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1448X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assed in respect of the partnership firm, partners would be liable to pay tax not paid by the partnership firm by virtue of the order of CIT(A) - Decided in favour of assessee. - Income Tax Appeal No. 2020 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 27-11-2013 - Mohit S. Shah, C.J. And M. S. Sanklecha,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A. K. Jasani For the Respondent : Mr. Arvind Pinto JUDGMENT (Per M. S. Sanklecha,J.): This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 3 July 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). This appeal relates to Assessment Year 2003-04. 2 Being aggrieved, the appellant has raised numerous questions of law. Howeve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... res. 6 In appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (CIT (A)) by an order dated 22 December 2006, upheld the order of the Assessing Officer to the extent it held that the partnership firm PONP was taxable in India. However, the share of the appellant as a partner in PONP was exempt under Section 10(2A) of the Act. However, the benefit of DTAA relief to the appellant as claimed was not granted. 7 On further appeal, the Tribunal dismissed the same on the preliminary ground that the appeal is not maintainable under Section 253(1) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the term assessee aggrieved would mean a party liable to pay tax in terms of the order appealed against. The impugned order gives the following reasons for dismissing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terms of Section 188A of the tax. Thus, there is a potential liability to pay tax. Thus, the appeal should be entertained otherwise the appellant's right to file an appeal would become time barred as when the assessment is finalized in respect of the firm viz: PONP. 9 Mr. Pinto, learned Counsel for the revenue supports the impugned order of the Tribunal. 10 We have considered the rival submissions. Without going into the larger question of what is meant by a person aggrieved in terms of Section 253 (1) of the Act, we find that in the present facts, if the basis of the test laid down by Tribunal in the impugned order is correctly applied, then appellant would meet the test of assessee aggrieved. The test laid down by the Tribunal viz: th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
