TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 1236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry to devote time energy for resolving an academic litigation - IT(SS)A.No.283 and 284/Ahd/2018 - - - Dated:- 29-7-2021 - Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President And Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Ms.Nupur Shah, AR For the Revenue : Shri Virendara Ojha, CIT-DR ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT Present two appeal are directed at the instance of the assessee against order of the ld.CIT(A)-11, Ahmedabad of even dated i.e. 7.8.2018 passed for the Asstt.Years 2011-12 and 2013-14. Since in both the assessment years, issues are common, therefore, for the sake of convenience, we dispose of both the appeals by this common order. 2. The grounds raised in both the appeals of the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years 2011-12 and 2013-14 respectively. 2,01,640/-. A search under section 132 of the Act was conducted in the group cases of Barter Group/Accommodation entry provider group of Ahmedabad on 4.12.2014. According to the AO, during the course of search certain incriminating materials were found and seized. On perusal of these materials, it indicated that certain details were belonged to the assessee, and therefore, a notice under section 153C was required to be served upon it. Accordingly, a notice under section 153C was issued to the assessee on 5.9.2016. After hearing the assessee, the ld.AO has passed the impugned assessment orders. He determined taxable income as under: Asstt.Year : 2011-12 6. After examination of the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er section 69 of the Act, but upheld action of the AO in issuing notice under section 153C of the Act. Still dissatisfied for not quashing the notice under section 153C of the Act, the assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Before us, submissions of both the parties are similar, as were made in the case of Dharmen Marble Stone (supra). For the sake brevity, we reproduce order of the Tribunal dated 11.6.2021 containing submissions of the parties and observation of the Tribunal. It reads as under: 5. The ld.CIT-DR at the outset submitted that against the order of the ld.CIT(A), no appeal has been preferred by the Revenue. Moreover, tax effect by virtue of relief given by the CIT(A) is less than the mandatory limit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessees. In future, on account of some proceedings for adjudication on the validity of the notice arises, then the assessee will be at liberty to apply for recall of this order, and may press this ground of appeal. With the above observation, this appeal is dismissed. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 7. In the light of the above order of the Tribunal, we are of the view that consideration of the issue on hand is superfluous, because nothing is placed before us to take a different view vis- -vis in the present two appeals. Therefore, following order of the Tribunal in the case cited (supra) (one of us i.e. Vice-President was author of that order), we reject ground of appeals by adopting same observations a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
