Global Cricket Corporation } Pte Limited } v. The Income Tax Appellate } Tribunal, Mumbai And Anr. }

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION JayantVishwanathINCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1763 OF 2017SalunkeWITHDigitally signed byJayant VishwanathSalunkeNOTICE OF MOTION NO. 631 OF 2018Date: 2018.09.0712:39:15 +0530 Global Cricket Corporation}Pte LImited}AppellantversusThe Income Tax Appellate}Tribunal, Mumbai and Anr.}Respondents Mr. J. P. Pardiwala-Senior Advocatei/b.Ms. Aarti Sathe for the appellant. Mr. Tejveer Singh for the respondents. CORAM :-S. C. DHARMADHIKARI &B. P. COLABAWALLA, JJ.DATE :- SEPTEMBER 5, 2018 P.C. :- 1.This appeal is brought by the assessee against an order onan application of the Revenue seeking to bring in additionalevidence. The prayer for additional evidence was made invokingRule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. It isstated that this application was moved by the Revenue during thecourse of hearing of certain appeals and the Revenue insisted thatan order be passed thereon so that if that application isaccepted/allowed and the additional evidence is allowed to betendered, the party aggrieved by such an order can go before thehigher forum. 2.We are, at the threshold, entertaining serious doubt as towhether such orders of the tribunal, passed during the course ofhearing of the appeals, by themselves enable the aggrievedparties to invoke this court's further appellate power undersection 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Presuming, butwithout expressing any final opinion on the maintainability of thepresent appeal, we are of the firm opinion that this appeal neednot be entertained. All that has been done by the tribunal is toallow the application. The operative order itself says that theapplication of the Revenue is allowed and the additional evidenceis admitted. 3.In the event the final orders in these appeals are adverse tothe interest of the assessee, then, it is clarified that whileimpugning and challenging them, it would be open for theassessee to raise all grounds, including in relation to theadmission of the additional evidence. Merely because we are notentertaining this appeal and at this stage would not preclude theassessee from raising the above ground. We also clarify that wehave not expressed any opinion on the rival contentions in regardto this order. If we entertain such appeals, we would be furtherpresuming that the additional evidences are necessarily beingrelied upon to make an order adverse to the interest of the appellants before this court. That could never be the presumptionon which we can proceed and in all cases. Therefore, in the eventthe final orders are adverse to the interest of the appellant before us, then, they can be challenged and in such challenge, thegrounds in relation to the impugned order can also be raised. 4.With the above clarification, this appeal is disposed of. 5.In the light of the disposal of the appeal, the notice of motiondoes not survive and stands disposed of as such. (B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)