sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Latest Expert Exchange
From the Courts »
  Oriental Bank Of Commerce Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Union of India vs. Pirthwi Singh (Supreme Court)
 Cromption Greaves Limited vs. CIT (ITAT Mumbai)
 Director Of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Modiluft Ltd.
 Director Of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Royal Airways Ltd.
 Lally Motors India (P.) Ltd vs. PCIT (ITAT Amritsar)
  Mehsana District Co-operative vs. DCIT (Gujarat High Court)
 Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
 Union of India vs. Pirthwi Singh (Supreme Court)
  In Re Hiten Ramanlal Mahimtura (ITAT Mumbai)

OM Sai Prasad Enterprises, 501, Jay Commercial Plaza, Junction of SL Road, and M G Road, Mulund West, Mumbai-400080 Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-23, C-10, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051.
July, 08th 2015
                    ,    ""  
     IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH, MUMBAI

   BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) AND AMIT SHUKLA, (JM)
     .. ,        ,                                  

                 ./I.T.A. No.1538/Mum/2011
               (   / Assessment Year :2007-08)


 OM Sai Prasad Enterprises,     / Commissioner of Income Tax-23,
 501, Jay Commercial Plaza,
                                Vs. C-10, Pratyakshakar Bhavan,
 Junction of SL Road, and M G           Bandra-Kurla Complex,
 Road,
 Mulund West,
                                        Bandra (E),
 Mumbai-400080                          Mumbai-400051.
       ( /Appellant)             ..     (    / Respondent)


         . /   . /PAN/GIR No. :AASFO5449B



           / Appellant by               None
             /Rspondent by              Shri Deep Kant Prasad



           / Date of Hearing                : 6.7.2015
           /Date of Pronouncement : 6.7.2015

                              / O R D E R

PER B.R. BASKARAN (AM)

      The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order      dated
13.1.2011 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax-23, Mumbai, under
section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for assessment year
2007-08. The assessee is challenging the validity of revision order passed
by the Commissioner of Income Tax. None appeared on behalf of the
assessee and hence, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex-parte,
without the presence of the assessee.
                                     2                  I T A N o . 1 5 3 8 / Mu m / 2 0 1 1








2.    We heard Ld D.R and perused the record. From the order passed vt
Ld Commissioner of Income tax, we notice that the Commissioner has
listed out items which have not been examined by the AO during the
course of assessment proceedings completed u/s 143(3) on 27.2.2009.
According to Ld CIT, those issues should have been examined in order to
arrive at the right total income of the assessee.       Accordingly he has
initiated the impugned revision proceedings. A perusal of the AO would
show that the AO did not discuss anything about those issues.                        The
assessee has also not furnished any document to show that they were
examined by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. The
failure on the part of the AO to examine the issues pointed out by the
Commissioner would render the assessment order erroneous and
prejudicial to the interest of revenue as per the decision of Hon'ble
Supreme Court rendered in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT
[2000] 243 ITR 83 (SC).    Hence, we are of the view that the assessment
order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the
revenue. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order
passed by Commissioner and hence, we uphold the same.







3.   In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed
     Pronounced accordingly on 6th July, 2015.
           6th July, 2015    

  Sd                                     sd
(    / AMIT SHUKLA)                  (..  / B.R. BASKARAN)
     / JUDICIAL MEMBER                  / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

 Mumbai: 6th July,2015.

. ../ SRL , Sr. PS
                            3           I T A N o . 1 5 3 8 / Mu m / 2 0 1 1



        /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.  / The Appellant
2.      / The Respondent.
3.     () / The CIT(A)- concerned
4.      / CIT concerned
5.      ,     ,  /
     DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned
6.     / Guard file.

                                             / BY ORDER,
True copy
                                       (Asstt. Registrar)
                                    ,  /ITAT, Mumbai

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - Company Overview

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions