9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 1452X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act" in short]. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed the present appeal in the status of HUF with PAN AACHG9948K for the assessment year 2002-03 against confirmation of the order passed under section 154 of the Act to quash the assessment completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 31.12.2007. Actually, this is second round of litigation before the Tribunal. 3. In the first round of litigation, the assessee has filed appeal with PAN AFKPM6731M in the status of Individual against the order of the ld. CIT(A) XII, Chennai dated 11.06.2008, while challenging the reopening of assessment passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 31.12.2007, besides challenging the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and notice was served on the assessee and assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act was completed. The actual assessment completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act with regard to the total income admitted by the assessee is of Rs..37,60,007/-. When the notice was issued under section 148 of the Act with regard to the capital gain issue, if the assessee noticed the PAN of "Individual" status and brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer, the typographical mistake committed in the order of the assessment would have rectified without passing any rectification order under section 154 of the Act. The appeal filed before the ld. CIT(A) on 21.02.2008 was in the status of Individual with PAN AFKPM6731M for return of inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 1955/Mds/2008. At that time of hearing of these appeals on earlier occasion, it was pointed out by the ld. AR of the assessee about the wrong mention of the status and challenged the order passed under section 154 of the Act. While deciding these appeals, vide its order dated 09.09.2011, the Tribunal has observed as under: "12. We have heard both the sides, on this point and find that as per order of the Assessing Officer passed under section 154 on 26.07.2010, the status of the assessee has been converted to HUF in place of individual, but this issue was not raised before the ld. CIT(A) and in view of the subsequent order passed by the Assessing Officer, in our considered view, the matter should go back to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
