ACIT, Cir. 1(2),, Pune v. Bhagwan H Soungar HUF, Pune

MA 111/PUN/2009 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 11124524 RSA 2009
Bench Pune
Appeal Number MA 111/PUN/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, Cir. 1(2),, Pune
Respondent Bhagwan H Soungar HUF, Pune
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 31-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 31-01-2011
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 28-08-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH PUNE BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO MA NO. 111/PN/09 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 797/PN/02) (BLOCK PERIOD ENDING 22/11/2000) ACIT (CENTRAL) CIRCLE-1(2) PUNE .... APPELLANT VS. BHAGWAN H. SOUNGAR HUF PROP. OF M/S. HIMANSHU DEVELOPERS 781/782 RAVIWAR PETH PUNE . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI ABHAY DAMLE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHRINIVASAN ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO AM THIS IS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE REVENUE ARISING OUT OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER BEARING ITA NO. 797/PN/07 FOR THE BLOCK P ERIOD ENDING 22/11/2000 AND ORDER DATED 31 ST AUGUST 2007. THE REVENUE IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN NOT CONFIRMING T HE LEVY OF SURCHARGE U/S.113 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT NEEDS RECTIFICATION IN VIEW O F THE HONBLE SUPREME COURTS DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS SURESH N. GUPTA 297 ITR 322 (SC) WHERE THE HONBLE COURT HELD THAT THE AMENDED PROVISIONS OF SEC TION 113 OF THE ACT ARE CLARIFICATORY IN APPLICATION AND THEREFORE RETROSPECTIV E IN NATURE. 2. DURING THE PROCEEDING BEFORE US ON THIS MA IT IS B ROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THE MATTER IS STILL DEBATABLE ISSUE IN VIEW OF THE ANOTHER JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS VATIKA T OWNSHIP P. LTD. 314 ITR 338 (SC). THE RATIO OF THE SAID JUDGMENT READS AS U NDER. IN RELATION TO BLOCK ASSESSMENT IN SEARCH CASES A PROVISO WAS ADDED WITH EFFECT FROM JUNE 1 2002 TO SECTION 113 OF TH E INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 TO THE EFFECT THAT THE TAX SHALL BE INCREASED BY A SURCHARGE. ON A CLAIM BY THE DEPARTMENT THAT THE PROVISO WAS RETROSPECTIVE THE SUPREME COURT REFERRED THE MATTER TO A LARGER BENCH . MA NO. 111/PN/09 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.797/PN/02 BLOCK PERIOD ENDING 22/11/2000 PAGE 2 OF2 3. IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE ABOVE SAID JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF VATIKA TOWNSHIP P. LTD (SUPRA) THAT T HE MATTER IS REFERRED TO THE LARGER BENCH. THE PERUSAL OF THIS JUDGMENT ALSO REVEALE D THAT THE JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS SURESH N. GUPTA (SUPRA) WAS ALSO CONSIDERED BEFORE REFERRING THE MATTER TO THE LARGER BENCH OF THE SUPREME COURT. TH EREFORE THE DISPUTE ON WHETHER THE AMENDED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 113 OF THE ACT ARE RETROSPECTIVE OR OTHERWISE IS STILL UNSETTLED AND THEREFORE THE ISSUE IS STILL DEBATABLE. 4. CONSIDERING THE PENDENCY OF THE ABOVE ISSUE BEFORE THE LARGER BENCH ON WHETHER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 113 OF THE ACT BEIN G RETROSPECTIVE IN APPLICATION OR NOT IN OUR OPINION IT IS A STILL AN UNSETTLED MATTER AND THEREFORE THE DEBATE IS STILL PERSISTS. THEREFORE IN VIEW OF TH E ABOVE WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT DEBATABLE ISSUES ARE OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF SECT ION 254(2) OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT. 5. IN THE RESULT THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE REVEN UE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 31 ST JANUARY 2011 SD/- SD/- (I. C. SUDHIR) (D.KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R PUNE DATED THE 31 ST JANUARY 2011 R COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. ACIT (CENTRAL) CIR-1(2) PUNE 2. ASSESSEE 3. CIT(A)-I PUNE 4. CIT(CENTRAL) PUNE 5. D.R. ITAT PUNE BENCH PUNE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T PUNE