The Commissioner Of Income Taxcentral Circle, Chennai v. Rakesh Sarin

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE CHITRA VENKATARAMANANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM The Commissioner of Income TaxCentral Circle, Chennai ...Appellant -vs- Rakesh Sarin...Respondent Prayer: Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Madras "A" Bench dated 09.06.2011 passed in IT(SS)No.66/Mds/2007 forthe Block Assessment Year 1997-1998 to 2002-03 and part of 2003-04.(Appeal No.CIT (A)-X/CHE/141/05-06 dated 04.01.2007 on the file ofthe Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-X, Chennai, against P.A./GIRNo.761R/ADXPR7428 R dated 30.06.2005 on the file of the DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II (1), Chennai -34) For appellant: Mr.M.Swaminathan For respondent : Mr.K.Ravi JUDGMENT (The Judgment of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN, J.) The present appeal relates to the Block Assessment years 1997-1998 to 2002-2003 and part of 2003-2004 filed at the instance of theRevenue raising the following questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right indismissing the appeal of the Department on the ground thatthe learned Single Judge had already held that blockassessment was barred by limitation against which WritAppeal was already filed and was pending? https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal was right in not considering the factthat W.A.No.874 of 2011 was admitted and in M.P.No.1 of 2011by an order dated 23.06.2011 the First Bench of the MadrasHigh Court had stayed the order of the learned Single Judgepassed in W.P.No.25078 of 2005? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ought to havedisposed off of the appeal filed by the Revenue on meritsespecially when Writ Appeal had been preferred against thelearned Single Judge order?" 2. In respect of the very same assessee by order dated24.09.2013 in W.A.No.874 of 2011, this Court had already consideredthe Revenue's appeal, as against the order passed by the learnedSingle Judge in allowing the writ petition by observing that theblock assessment was not barred by limitation and hence withinjurisdiction. Thus this Court allowed the Writ Appeal. 3. The present appeal arises out of the consequential assessmentorders passed and thereafter further appeal wherein Income TaxAppellate Tribunal cancelled the block assessment as time barred. 4. Considering the fact that we have already allowed theRevenue's Appeal in W.A.No.874 of 2011 dated 24.09.2013, the orderpassed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has to be set aside andthe matter is restored back to the file of the Tribunal for thepurpose of considering the case of the assessee on merits other thanthe question of limitation. 5. In the circumstances, while allowing the Tax Case (Appeal),we set aside the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunaland remit the matter back to the file of the Tribunal for itsconsideration on merits other than the point of limitation. 6. With the above direction, this Tax Case (Appeal) is disposedof. No costs.Sd/Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar vj2 To 1. The Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras "A" Bench, Rajaji Bhavan, III Floor, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 90. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-X), Chennai-34. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Chennai. 4. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle II (1), Chennai-34. Tax Case (Appeal) No.677 of 2013 JRG(CO)PSI 18/11/2013