| |
| The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 8084 (Kol-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 254
AO had no locus standi to file an appeal against his own findings in the remand report. Thus, the instant appeal was not maintainable.
|
Appeal (Tribunal) - Maintainability - Whether AO can file an appeal against his own findings in the remand report -
AO made addition under section 68. However, he had stated in his remand report that the documentary evidences produced during the remand proceedings proved the identity of share applicants and genuineness of transactions with each share applicant. Based on that remand report, CIT (A) deleted the addition under section 68 made by AO. Subsequently, AO had filed instant appeal against his own finding in remand report. Held: Since the AO himself had in the remand report accepted the identity of share applicants and genuineness of transactions with each share applicant, therefore, he had no locus standi to file an appeal against his own findings in the remand report. Hence, the instant appeal filed by the revenue was not maintainable.
Relied:B. Jayalakshmi v. Asstt. CIT (2018) 96 taxmann.com 486 (Madras) : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 4908 (Mad-HC), and Dy. CIT v. Shraddha Tower (P.) Ltd. [IT(SS)A.Nos.55-58/Kol//2016, dt. 24-10-2018] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 7777 (Kol-Trib)
REFERRED : Jivatlal Purtapshi v. CIT (1967) 065 ITR 0261 (Bom) : 1967 TaxPub(DT) 0297 (Bom-HC), and ACIT v. R.P.G. Credit & Capital Ltd. (2015) 155 ITD 0029 (Del) : 2015 TaxPub(DT) 3045 (Del-Trib)
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2009-10
IN THE ITAT, KOLKATA BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|