Itat/46/2021 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 Kolkata v. M/S West Bengal State Electricity Transmission Co Ltd

ITAT/46/2021IA No.GA/1/2021IA No.GA/2/2021IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASpecial Jurisdiction (Income Tax)ORIGINAL SIDE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX-1, KOLKATA -Versus- M/S. WEST BENGAL STATEELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION CO.LTD. Appearance:Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Adv.Mr. Anurag Roy, Adv....for the appellant.Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pranit Bag, Adv.Mr. Anuj Mishra, Adv....for the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM The Hon’ble JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA The Court : We have heard Mr. Vipul Kumdalia, learned standing counsel assisted by Mr. Anurag Roy, learned Advocateappearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J. P. Khaitan,learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Pranit Bag and Mr. AnujMishra, learned Advocates for the respondent. There is a delay of 328 days in filing the appeal. Onperusal of the relevant dates we find that the appellant/revenuewould be entitled to the benefit of the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court extending the period of limitation forfiling of appeal under various enactments. For such reasons, theapplication for condonation of delay (IA No.GA/1/2021) isallowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Re: ITAT/46/2021: This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directedagainst the order dated 18[th] December, 2019 passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata (the ‘Tribunal’ inshort) ITA No.1261/Kol/2018 for the assessment year 2008-09. The revenue has framed for the following substantialquestions of law for consideration: “a) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case theLearned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified inlaw confirming the Order of the Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeal) who relied the order passed by the Tribunalin ITA No.1005(Kol) of 2013 but Learned Tribunal ignoringthe fact that the Department has already filed appealbefore the Hon’ble Court against the said order ?b) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case theLearned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal failed toappreciate that the case involved substantial amount ofrevenue as well as audit objection ? c) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case theLearned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified inlaw in quashing the revisional order under section 263 ofthe Act passed by Commissioner of Income Tax ?” We have heard Mr. Vipul Kundalia, learned standingcounsel for the appellant/revenue. The order impugned in this appeal passed by thetribunal arises out of an order of assessment passed by theDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kolkata dated 3[rd]March, 2014 under Section 263 read with Section 143(3) of theAct. As against the order passed by the Commissioner underSection 263 of the Act, the matter travelled to the tribunal andthereafter before this Court in ITAT No.155/2017. By judgmentdated 13[th] December, 2021 the appeal filed by the revenue wasdismissed and the substantial questions of law were answeredagainst the revenue. The present proceedings being a sequel tothe order passed under Section 263 has to be necessarilyrejected in the light of the order in ITAT/155/2017.For the above reasons, the appeal filed by the revenue(ITAT/46/2021) is dismissed and the substantial questions of laware answered against the revenue.Consequently, the connected application for stay IANo.GA/2/2021 stands closed. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)