Manupatra

Fill in the following details to e-mail

Subject

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> </head> <body> <div style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size:12px; text-align:justify"> <table width="800" border="0" style="border:1px solid #ccc;padding:5px;" align="center" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Assessee cannot agitate once again on the same issues, which are already adjudicated MANU/IX/0301/2022 - (05 May 2022) </td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Smt. Kanchana Bai Chordia vs. The Income Tax Officer, Chennai</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" style="background-color:#FDEDCE">The assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 2010-11 declaring total income and the same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, the return was selected for scrutiny and after following due procedures, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the IT Act by assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs. 44,10,951 after making addition towards disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 35(1)(iii) of the IT Act of Rs. 2,50,000 and addition towards long term capital gains tax. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 
The issue of claim of relief under Section 54 of the IT Act is pending before the ITAT by way of miscellaneous petition. Meanwhile, the assessee has filed another appeal against the original assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the IT Act before the learned CIT(A) belatedly after a delay of 2002 days. However, the learned CIT(A) has noted from the grounds taken and the issues raised are already adjudicated in the appeal filed against the order under Section 147 of the IT Act by the learned CIT(A) vide his order and thereafter by ITAT in its order. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) was of the opinion that, the assessee cannot agitate once again on the same issues, which are already adjudicated. Hence, the appeal filed now before the learned CIT(A) against the original assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act is not maintainable in law. 
Since the assessee has initially preferred an appeal against the reassessment order under Section 147 of the IT Act against which, the assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and the same was concluded by the learned CIT(A) vide his order, against which, the appeal filed before the ITAT has also been concluded vide Tribunal's order. Since the assessee has again filed another appeal against the original assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act with a delay of 2002 days by raising the issues already adjudicated in the appeal filed against the order under Section 147 of the IT Act, the learned CIT(A) has correctly dismissed the appeal on both the counts of delay and non-maintainability of the appeal filed by the assessee. There is no reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned CIT(A). The appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" ></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" >Tags : Assessment, Additions, Legality</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td> </tr> <tr>  <td align="left" valign="top">Source : newsroom.manupatra.com</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Regards</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Team Manupatra</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td> </tr> </table> </div> </body> </html>