TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 909X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appreciating the facts on record.M.A. filed by the assessee is dismissed. - M.A.No.-195/Del/2017 [In ITA No.6444/Del/2014] - - - Dated:- 20-2-2023 - SHRI KUL BHARAT , JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri Anil Kumar Malhotra , CA For the Respondent : Shri N. K. Bansal , Sr. DR ORDER PER KUL BHARAT , JM : This Miscellaneous Application (M.A.) has been filed by the assessee seeking recalling of the order passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.6444/Del/2014 pertaining to Assessment Year 2010-11 vide order dated 03.08.2015. 2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in M.A. The relevant contents of the M.A. are reproduced as under:- The sale ground of appeal is stated as under:- The Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the Ld. Assessing Officer to modify the assessment order and treat the entire income assessee by the Ld. Assessing Officer of the assessee as income from house property against income from other sources assessed by him (DClT) whereas the assessee declared the same as income from business. The order passed by the Hon'ble CIT(A) is arbitrary and is no founded on facts. Wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thorities and Municipal Corporation of Delhi comes to Rs.1.35 crore only. The assessee is a corporate assessee and the litigation and the amount involved in the litigation could not be said to be of that magnitude that the assessee could not restart its business during the past 27 years. The facts of the case lead to the conclusion that the assessee is no more interested in restarting its business and has let out its factory premises along with its machinery, furniture and fixtures for a fixed amount of rent and therefore, the action of learned CIT(A) in directing to treat the income under the head income from house property was justified and no interference in the same is called for. In this view of the matter, the order of learned CIT(A) is confirmed and the ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Unquote From the above, it can be interpreted that the Hon'ble ITAT has stated that the assessee had to discontinue its business since the year 1988 due to litigation pending before the Delhi High Court of Central Excise and Sales Tax authorities. Whereas the fact is that the assessee company started its business of manufacturing of radio, transistors, T.V. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TAT that on account of litigation such as sales tax, excise duty pending in Hon'ble Delhi High Court is not a sufficient reason to apply the facts of Apex Supreme Court decision in CIT vs. Vikram Cotton Mills (Supra) where as it is not the litigation of these two cases of Central Excise, Sales Tax but such labour unrest which lead to the company to handover its entire wherewithal in 1988, but to fight huge number of cases using personal funds by the directors, as can be observed from the liability side of the Balance sheet Rs.35 lacs which money was taken to fight litigation case, the fact of labour and the fact of labour unrest wage heavily on assessee's present and future. Therefore, even passage of 28 years has not severed the responsibilities originating from its original activity of manufacturing T.V. It is notable that had the company not interested in continuity then why it is holding its Brand Bigston T.V. which is worth many millions of payment. Sir, the very basis of the word litigation has been wrongly applied whereas the assessee's main grounds of appeal was against the CIT(A) order who was interpreting the income from business (reflected by assessee) as inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he litigation before Hon ble Delhi High Court, Delhi Small Industrial Corporation Ltd., Sales Tax authorities, Central Excise authorities and Municipal Corporation of Delhi comes to ₹ 1.35 crores only. The assessee is a corporate assessee and the litigation and the amount involved in the litigation could not be said to be of that magnitude that the assessee could not restart its business during the past 27 years. The facts of the case lead to the conclusion that the assessee is no more interested in restarting its business and has let out its factory premises along with its machinery, furniture and fixtures for a fixed amount of rent and, therefore, the action of learned CIT(A) in directing to treat the income under the head income from house property was justified and no interference in the same is called for. In this view of the matter, the order of learned CIT(A) is confirmed and the ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 6. By way of present M.A., the assessee is seeking recalling of the order dated 03.08.2015 in ITA No.6444/Del/2015 passed by the Tribunal. The assessee has failed to point out error which is apparent from the record and can be rectified u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
