TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 500X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. CIT(A) to issue defect memo to the assessee to remove the defect in Form No.35 filed before the ld. CIT(A) and in turn assessee should remove the defect. Therefore, we set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and remit this matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate assessee s (AOP) appeal on merit. For statistical purposes, these three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. - ITA Nos. 252 to 254/S RT/ 2022 - - - Dated:- 30-11-2022 - SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM AND DR. A. L. SAINI, AM For the Assessee : Shri Ashwin K. Parekh, AR For the Respondent : Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-DR with Shri Vionod Kumar, Sr. DR ORDER PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned three appeals filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Years (AYs) 2011-12 and 2013-14, are directed against the separate orders passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Surat [in short the ld. CIT(A) ], which in turn arise out of separate assessment orders passed by Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c)and 271(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). 2. Since, these three appeals relates to the same assessee, common and identical issues, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment order was passed by Income-tax Officer, Ward-1, Bardoli who is not under Jurisdiction of CIT(A)-4, Surat, the pending appeal for A.Y.2011-12 and A.Y.2013-14 were transferred to National Faceless Appeal Centre by CIT(A)- 4, Surat. (7) The CIT(A)-4 ought to have transferred this appeal to National Faceless Appeal Centre. The order passed u/s. 250 dtd. 01.08.2022 without considering the merits of the case is in violations of order of Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Surat Bench. The order passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is without Jurisdiction as CIT(A)-4 cannot pass any order either of admission or rejection of appeal when according to CIT(A) he has no Jurisdiction. (8) The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had disposed off order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act for A.Y.2012-13 in appeal No. CIT(A),Surat- 4/10263/2014-15 by Order dtd. 04.04.2022. Copy of Order dtd. 04.04.2022 u/s. 250 of the Act for A.Y.2012-13 is enclosed (Page 106 to 109). (9) While adjudicating and allowing the appeal of A.Y.2012-13, the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) used the PAN of Bhaveshbhai Arvindbhai Buha (Individual) in Order dtd. 04.04.2022 though ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (iv) The decision of the Hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench in the case of M/s. Schlumberger Asia Services Limited V/s. DDIT in ITA No. 809 and 810/ Del/2016. (Page 122 to 132). In this case the appeal was filed by individual against the tax demand raised by making the assessment of income in the hands of alleged AOP despite the contention of assessee that there does not exists any AOP. It was held that the income it taxable in the hands of individual. (15) The CIT(A)-4, Surat has passed the order holding that there] does not exist any AOP and income is taxable in the case of individual and therefore, all appeals against the assessment made or penalty levied on AOP should have been disposed of by allowing the same in favour of assessee. (16) Therefore, the Appellant tenders a humble request to the Hon'ble Bench to set-aside the order passed by C1T(A) - 4, Surat and direct the CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the Revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the ld. CIT(A). 6. Now, we shall take assessee s appeal in ITA No.253 to 254/SRT/2022 for AY.2013-14. The Ld. Counsel for the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT(A)- 4, Surat. (7) The CIT(A)-4 ought to have transferred this appeal to National Faceless Appeal Centre. The order passed u/s. 250 dtd. 01.08.2022 without considering the merits of the case is in violations of order of Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Surat Bench. The order passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is without Jurisdiction as CIT(A)-4 cannot pass any order either of admission or rejection of appeal when according to CIT(A) he has no Jurisdiction. (8) The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had disposed of order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act for A.Y.2012-13 in appeal No. CIT(A),Surat- 4/10263/2014-15 by Order dtd. 04.04.2022. Copy of Order dtd. 04.04,2022 u/s. 250 of the Act for A.Y.2012-13 is enclosed (Page 105 to 108). (9) While adjudicating and allowing the appeal of A.Y.2012-13, the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) used the PAN of Bhaveshbhai Arvindbhai Buha (Individual) in Order dtd. 04.04.2022 though in Form No. 35 for A.Y.2012-13, the Appellant did not fill in the column of PAN. (10) The order of A.Y.2012-13 was signed digitally and required to be uploaded due to mandatory requirement of passing the order online by ea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed by individual against the tax demand raised by making the assessment of income in the hands of alleged AOP despite the contention of assessee that there does not exists any AOP. It was held that the income it taxable in the hands of individual. (15) The CIT(A)-4, Surat has passed the order holding that there does not exist any AOP and income is taxable in the case of individual and therefore, all appeals against the assessments made or penalty levied on AOP should have been disposed of by allowing the same in favour of assessee. (16) Therefore, the Appellant tenders a humble request to the Hon'ble Bench to set-aside the order passed by CIT(A) - 4, Surat and direct the CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the Revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the ld. CIT(A). 8. We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submissions put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the facts of the case including the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and other material brought on record. We note that ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
