TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 607X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al of the petitioner for the assessment year 2003-04 [ 2018 (5) TMI 1977 - ITAT MUMBAI] That being the position and on due consideration, we interfere with the impugned order [ 2019 (4) TMI 1842 - ITAT MUMBAI] passed by the Tribunal to the effect that order. [ 2018 (5) TMI 1977 - ITAT MUMBAI] would stand recalled qua both the grounds - WRIT PETITION NO.2249 OF 2019 - - - Dated:- 6-3-2020 - UJJAL BHUYAN, MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. Mr. D. H. Jain a/w. Ms Radha Halbe for Petitioner. Mr. Suresh Kumar for Respondents. P.C. : Heard Mr. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kumar, learned standing counsel Revenue for the respondents. 2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount of conversion by the appellant of the shares held as stock-in-trade into investments on 1.4.2002. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate and ought to have held that no income arose to the appellant on such conversion that was an unilateral act by the appellant and it was not a transaction giving rise to any income. Your appellant, therefore, prays that the addition be deleted. 5. On the other hand, the sole ground urged by the petitioner before the Tribunal in the appeal pertaining to the assessment year 2006-07 was as under: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and also in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in enhancing the assessment by bringing to tax a sum of ₹ 9,11,883/- u/s.41(1) of the Act being the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nto investment as on 01.04.2002, treating the same as business income under Section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act for short). We find that this was the sole ground of appeal by the petitioner in the appeal for the assessment year 2006-07. 7. After due consideration, Tribunal affirmed the view taken by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal of the petitioner. In paragraph 12 of the order, Tribunal indicated that both the appeal of assessee and revenue are dismissed . The appeal of the assessee and revenue thus pertained to the assessment year 2006-07. 8. With the grievance that there was no adjudication on the appeal filed by the petitioner for the assessment year 2003-04, petitioner filed an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the appeals. We find that while passing the order dated 30.05.2018, Tribunal had dismissed the appeal of the petitioner for the assessment year 2006- 07 i.e., I.T.A.No.3113/Mum/2015 along with the appeal of the revenue being I.T.A.No.3355/Mum/2015 for the same assessment year. There was omission to deal with the appeal of the petitioner for the assessment year 2003-04 i.e., I.T.A.No.7501/Mum/2016. 13. That being the position and on due consideration, we interfere with the impugned order dated 12.04.2019 passed by the Tribunal in M.A.No.632/Mum/2018 to the effect that order dated 30.05.2018 would stand recalled qua both the grounds in I.T.A.No.7501/Mum/2016. 13.1. Tribunal shall now hear the aforesaid appeal being I.T.A.No.7501/ Mum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
