TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 1014X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame read as under: ITAs No/Mum//-AY-2005-06, /Mum//- AY-2006-07, /Mum/-AY-2007-08 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that legal sanctity of law, the interest chargeable u/s. 234A,234B 234C is not only consequential but is mandatory in nature. 2.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Special Court Act, 1992 has not ruled out the provisions of Section 234A, 234B 234C being not applicable to the notified persons or they are exempt from the liability of payment of interest under these section of Income-tax Act, 1961. 3.The appellant craves to leave, to add, to amend and / or to alter any o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t involved is ₹ 6.37Crores and ₹ 7.13 Crores respectively. Assessee has also filed identical additional ground for all the three AYs. and it reads as under: 1.The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that as per the decision of Hon ble Special Court dated 30.04.2010 in MP No. 41 of 1999, the assets under consideration and the consequential income belongs to Shri Harshad S. Mehta and hence the income assessed by the Assessing Officer ought to have been taxed in the hands of Shri Harshad S. Mehta and not in the hands of the appellant. Vide her letters dated 15.07.2013 assessee made a request to admit the above mentioned addition ground. We find that similar additional ground was raised in the case of Sh.Hitesh S Mehta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is to be required to be given to the AO in this respect because if the Hon ble Apex Court decides that all the income belongs to Shri Harshad S. Mehta, then the income has to be assessed in the hands of Shri Harshad S. Mehta, not in the hands of any other person. Therefore, in our view, there is no need to issue any direction as the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court has to be followed in any case, Accordingly by admitting the grounds raised by the assessee for all the years, we treat the same as academic in nature. Following the above we admit the additional ground for all the years-treating the same as academic in nature. Details of dates of filing of returns ,incomes returned, dates of assessment, assessed incomes, dates of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , that the provisions of Special Court had overriding effect over the Income Tax Act, that all the assets were under the control of the custodian, that the appellant could not have paid the advance tax unless directed by the Special Court, that the assessee did not have control over its income/assets, that she could not be penalised for non-payment of advance tax. After considering the submissions of the assessee and the order passed by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of M/s.Orient Travel Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 6868/Mum/2008-AY 2004-05), Pallvi Holding, Topaz Holding and Harsh Estate Pvt. Ltd. and other cases of Harshad Mehta group, he held that assessee did not have control over the her funds/assets, that she could not be held as defaulter for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
