TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 895X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the Revenue on 22.06.2007 and the order of the Tribunal had also attained finality - if the Revenue is questioning the quantum of relief granted to the assessee, the order available for revision would be the order dated 18.05.2005 - this is not subjected to any revision u/s 147 of the Act, the Revenue would not be justified in sustaining its plea on its jurisdiction to revise the order u/s 147 of the Act – Decided against Revenue. - Tax Case (Appeal). No. 743 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 10-4-2014 - Chitra Venkataraman And T. S. Sivagnanam,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. T. Ravikumar, Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department. For the Respondent : Mr. V. S. Jayakumar JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by Chitra Venka ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 12.01.2005. This was taken on appeal by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on 22.6.2007 in ITA.No.842/Mds/2005. Admittedly this order of the Tribunal was not appealed against, hence, it attained finality. 3. It is a matter of record and as stated in the grounds of appeal before this Court too that the Assessing Officer passed an order giving effect to the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on 18.01.2005 and granted deduction under Section 80IB of the Act as computed by the assessee at Rs.47,00,000/-. Holding that the assessee was not entitled to the said deduction in entirety and that the deduction under Section 80IB of the Act had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igh Court decision could not be a ground for re-opening the assessment. Thus, applying the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of DCIT Vs. M/s.Simplex Concrete Piles (India)Ltd in Civil Appeal No.2329 of 2006 dated 11.09.2004 and the decision reported in 319 ITR 208 in the case of Mepco Industries Ltd Vs. CIT and another, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal and hence, the present appeal by the Revenue. 4. After considering the merits of the case canvassed by the Revenue, we do not think that we need to go into the above said decisions or the correctness of the Tribunal's order for the following reasons :- As already pointed out in the preceding paragraphs, the original assessment under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
