Case Law Details
Case Name : CIT (DR)- XII, ITAT Vs Simoni Gems (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 1999- 2000
Courts :
All ITAT ITAT Mumbai
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
CIT (DR)- XII, ITAT Vs. Simoni Gems (ITAT Mumbai) –In appeal assessee raised preliminary objection that the notice u/s 143(2) was not issued within the prescribed period of 12 months and AO accepted that the notice under 143(2) notice was not been issued in time. Accordingly, the Tribunal, relying on Hotel Blue Moon 321 ITR 362 (SC), dismissed the department’s appeal without going into the merits of the appeal.
Thereafter, the CIT-DR written two letters to the ITAT Members in which he made the following arguments:-
(i) permitting the assessee to argue first in the department’s app...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
In my opinion, the CBDT must immediately challenge this order as the ITAT cannot assume the powers of a court to invoke the Contampt of Courts Act. This will set very pernicious precedent. One must not forget the duty of the CIT(DR) who has to work for safeguarding revenue’s interst. This incident in the context of Anna Hazare-Jan Lokpal debate is very suggestive. I hope the concerned agencies will not ignore the matter in the light of the Lokpal-Jan Lokpal acrimony and unanimity.
It reminds one of a similar action taken by the Chennai Bench long ago. But, the question is, whether the ITAT is within its jurisdiction to invoke the provisions of the Contempt of Cort’s Act.