ITA No. 366 of 2009(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. ITA No. 366 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision 29 .1.2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ... Appellant Versus Shri P.K.Sarwal ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga ,Advocate for the appellant 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement ? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. This order shall dispose of bunch of four appeals as they are directed against a common order dated 16.11.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'D', New Delhi (for brevity 'the Tribunal') in ITA Nos. 5440-5443/Del/2004 in respect of the same assessee for the assessment years 1996-97 to 1999-2000. For the purpose of this judgement, facts are being taken from ITA No.366 of 2009. In respect of the assessment year 1999-2000, the assessee filed his return on 19.3.2002 declaring an income of Rs. 67,420/-. The assessment was completed vide order dated 26.3.2002 passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at an income of Rs. 3,00,000/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) against the order dated 26.3.2002 which was allowed. The Commissioner of Income Tax (A) assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 25,000/- per month which comes to Rs. 3,00,000/-. The Revenue did not accept the order of the ITA No. 366 of 2009(O&M) 2 CIT(A) and preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 16.11.2007 restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction that assessment was to be framed de-novo as per provisions of law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The Tribunal has passed the above order on the basis of the concession made by the parties, which is apparent from the perusal of following paras : “ The assessee did not submit the details. Taking into account the low house hold withdrawals, the AO estimated the income of the assessee for all these years at Rs. 25,000/- p.m. thereby assessing the business income of the assessee at Rs. 3 lacs. The Ld. DR relying on the assessment orders pleaded that the additions have wrongly been deleted in part ld CIT(A) and the order of AO should be restored. On the other hand the ld.AR of the assessee pleaded that the assessee has not received the copy of grounds of appeal filed by the revenue. He contended that assessee is also aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) and wants to file cross objections. However, he contended that in the interest of justice, if the appeals are restored back to the file of the AO for making de-novo assessment, the assessee has no objection. The ld. DR did not object to such submission of the ld. AR.” Once the order dated 16.11.2007 is based on the concession made by the parties then such an order is not challengeable. The appeal is wholly without merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, all the ITA No. 366 of 2009(O&M) 3 appeals fail and the same are dismissed. A copy of this order be placed on the file of connected appeals. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Ajay Tewari ) 29.1.2010 Judge okg * ITA No. 366 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax v. P.K.Sarwal ITA No. 367 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax v. P.K.Sarwal ITA No. 368 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax v. P.K.Sarwal ITA No. 369 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax v. P.K.Sarwal