Itta/390/2013 Of Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply And Sewerage Board v. The Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH ATHYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAAND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU I.T.T.A. No. 390 of 2013 DATE: 01.10.2013 Between: Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply &Sewerage Board, Hyderabad. … Appellant And The Additional Commissioner of Income TaxRange-6, Hyderabad. … Respondent This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU I.T.T.A. No. 390 of 2013 JUDGMENT:(Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated16.08.2012 passed by the learned Tribunal in I.T.A.No.2047/Hyd/2011 andsought to be admitted on the following suggested questions of law. 1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether theorder of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is not perverse inreferring to a decision of Supreme Court that is not applicable onfacts and holding that initiation of proceedings u/s. 147 of IncomeTax Act is valid? 2.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in not appreciatingthe fact that in the assesee’s case the initiation of proceedingsu/s. 147 is on the basis of internal audit objection which is clearlycovered by the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Indian &Eastern News Paper Society reported in 119 ITR 996 and that thedecision of PVS Beedies reported in 237 ITR 13 which relate tocase of pointing out a mistake of fact, and holding that theproceedings u/s. 147 is validly initiated? 3.on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in setting asidethe matter with regard to arriving at WDV after reducing grantsand working out WDV from 01.04.1989 to the file ofCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to examine theimplication of provisions of explanation 6 to Sec.43(6) of the Actin spite of his specific finding that it is not applicable since thebooks of account are found to be incorrect as far as WDV is concerned, instead of giving a specific finding on its application? We have heard Sri K. Vasantkumar, learned counsel for the appellant and gone through the impugned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal. It appears that the learned Tribunal has not decided anything andremanded the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decidethe issue afresh, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. When the learned Tribunal has not taken any decision, it is very difficultfor this Court to admit the appeal. Therefore, we do not admit the appeal. Itcannot be disputed that the Tribunal has no power to remand the matter. When the Tribunal remanded the matter on just and reasonable ground, thesame cannot be interfered with. However, liberty is given to the appellant toraise all the points before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at thetime of fresh hearing. We desire that the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) shall decide the matter within a period of one month from the dateof communication of this order. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. _____________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ ________________ K. C. BHANU, J