9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the Department has filed cross appeals for assessment years 2015-16 & 2016-17 in ITA No. 986/Del/2024 and ITA No. 980/Del/2024, respectively. ITA No. 621/Del/2024 for AY 2015-16 has been filed by different assessee though from the same group. Since, identical issue is involved in all these appeals, these appeals are taken up together for adjudication and are decided by this common order. 2. For the sake of convenience, the Appeal in ITA No. 621/Del/2024 (AY 2015-16) is taken up as lead case, hence, facts are narrated from the said appeal. ITA NO. 621/DEL/2024 (AY 2015-16) 3. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi dated 13.12.2023. The assessee is in second ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... formation Act, the order of Tribunal was served upon the Department on 28.03.2019. Thus, the limitation for passing the assessment order consequent to directions of the Tribunal was upto 31.12.2019, whereas, the assessment order has been passed by the Assessing Officer on 23.04.2021 i.e. much beyond the limitation period. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in identical set of facts, the Coordinate Bench in assessee's group concern in ITA No.457/Del/2024 for AY 2012-13 titled Tera Hotels & Resorts P Ltd. vs. DCIT decided on 12.03.2025 held that once the order has been served on the Departmental Representative of the Revenue, the limitation starts. Similar view has been taken by the Tribunal in assessee's group case in ITA No. 3817 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case laws and provisions. The actual litigant is the concerned CIT itself, while the CIT/DR acts on its behalf and assists the Tribunal. Case laws clarify that the CIT/DR is not a party to the appeal but only a representative, with no independent right to appeal or contest beyond the department's stance. 1. CIT vs. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. (1961) - Supreme Court Ruling-The Supreme Court ruled that the Revenue Department is the real litigant, not the CIT/DR, who only assists the tribunal and presents the department's case.(Ref- Page 5) 2. ITAT Rules, 1963 - Rule 10 (Representation of Parties) (Ref- Page 6). 3. Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Anil Kumar Nehru (2004) -The court clarified that the DR is merely an officer assi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e authorities below examined. The short issue argued before us by the rival sides is, whether the assessment order passed u/s. 153(3) with read section 253/143(3) of the Act is within the period of limitation? In so far as the limitation period for passing the assessment order i.e. 09 months from the end of the financial year in which the Tribunal order was received is not in dispute. The issue in dispute is the date of start of limitation i.e. the date of service of Tribunal order on the Department. According to the department, the order was served on Commissioner (Judicial) on 08.04.2019, therefore, the limitation to pass assessment order starts from said date. Whereas, the case of the assessee is that since the order of the Tribunalwas s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terms that once the order is listed for pronouncement in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the department representative or the Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial) should be taken to be aware of the order. From that point, it is a purely internal administrative arrangement as to how the Departmental representative or Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial) obtains and further communicates the order to the officer who has to take decision on filing the appeal or any pertinent decision. It may be relevant to extract to relevant para of the judgment in Surendra Kumar Jain ( supra) which is decisive in the controversy in hand: "it is quite evident from the decision in Odean Builders (sura) that limitation begins ( for any purpose under the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e been passed much beyond the statutory time limit available under s. 153(3) of the Act and thus a nullity in law at the threshold." 9. We further find that while deciding appeals of assessee's group entities, the Coordinate Bench in lead appeal ITA No. 3817/Del/2023 (Supra) under identical set of facts held that the period of limitation starts from the date of the order served on CIT(DR) office. 10. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the Tribunal order dated 28.02.2019 was pronounced in the open court and thus, the CIT(DR) had knowledge of the said order. Further, the order was served on CIT(DR) on the same date. Thus, in light of facts of the case and the decisions rendered above, we find merits in Ground No. 3 of appeal. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
