Shri Sharad B. Pitti vs The Joint Commissioner Of Income ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 902 Tel

             THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                             AND
                    THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
                                  I.T.T.A.No.297 of 2006
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)

         Heard Mr. Naga Deepak, learned counsel for the appellant

and Ms. Sapna Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee as the

appellant against the order dated 18.12.2001 passed by the

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A',

Hyderabad (Tribunal) in I.T.A.No.38/Hyd/2001 for the

assessment year 1996-97.

3. After a detailed hearing on 25.07.2006, this Court framed

the following question as substantial question of law for

consideration:

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal having found that the appellant was the owner of the personal effects and that the creditworthiness of the purchasers could not be doubted was correct in law in directing the revenue to conduct investigation afresh on the question whether these were personal effects ?

::2::

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that on the

above issue, Tribunal had remanded the matter back to the file of

the assessing officer for a fresh consideration. The order of the

CIT(A) on this issue was set aside and matter was remanded back

to the assessing officer vide the order dated 18.12.2001.

5. According to learned counsel for the appellant, though the

remand order was passed by the Tribunal on 18.12.2001 and the

limitation period for passing consequential order on remand as

contemplated under Section 153(3) of the Act is one year from

the end of the financial year in which the order is passed,

assessing officer has not yet passed the consequential order on

remand.

6. Without expressing any opinion in this regard, we are of

the view that since the Tribunal has remanded the matter back to

the assessing officer after setting aside the adverse order of

CIT(A), no live issue can be said to survive for consideration in

this appeal.

::3::

7. Appeal is accordingly closed. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand

closed.

__________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

_______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 22.02.2023 LUR