ITO 25(3)(1), MUMBAI v. CENTRAL PLASTICS, MUMBAI

ITA 4254/MUM/2010 | 1999-2000
Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 425419914 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AABFC2573A
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 4254/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant ITO 25(3)(1), MUMBAI
Respondent CENTRAL PLASTICS, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 08-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 08-07-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 30-05-2012
Next Hearing Date 30-05-2012
Assessment Year 1999-2000
Appeal Filed On 25-05-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES C MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI D.K.AGARWAL (JM) AND B.RAMAKOTAIAH (A .M ) ITA NO.4254/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1999-2000) INCOME TAX OFFICER 25(3)(1) ROOM NO.307 3 RD FLOOR BLDG.C-11 PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX BANDRA (E) MUMBAI-400051 M/S CENTRAL PLASTICS 28 ABCD INDUSTRIAL ESTATE CHARKOP KANDIVALI (WEST) MUMBAI-400067. PAN: AABFC2573A APPELLANT V/S RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.K.B .MENON RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER D.K.AGARWAL (JM) THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 7.4.2010 PASSED BY THE LEAR NED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000 TAKING FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : . 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DIREC TING THE AO TO ACCEPT THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND AT RS.2 28 873/- IN PLACE OF RS.3 32 640/- AS DECLARE D BY THE ASSESSEE AND COMPUTE THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GA IN. 2. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE GROUND BE SET ASIDE AND THAT O F THE AO BE RESTORED. ITA NO.4254/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1999-2000) 2 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED THA T THE TAX EFFECT ON THE ABOVE DISPUTED AMOUNT IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE WORKS OUT TO LESS THAN RS.2 00 000/-. T HE LEARNED D.R. DID NOT DISPUTE ON THE SAID FACTUAL MA TRIX OF THE CASE. 3. THAT BEING SO AND IN TERMS OF INSTRUCTION NO. 3/ 2011 [F.NO.279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ] DATED 9.2.2011 ISSUE D BY THE C.B.D.T. THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE FILED THE APPEAL AND ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8TH JULY 2 011. SD SD (B.RAMAKOTAIAH) (D.K.AG ARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI DATED 8TH JULY 2011 SRL: ITA NO.4254/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1999-2000) 3 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. DR CONCERNED BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI