TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (10) TMI 1132
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd ITA No. 852/Mum/2011/,AY- 2005-06 For the AY.2004-05 & 2005-06 AO has filed following grounds of appeal: "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that legal sanctity of law, the interest chargeable u/s. 234A,234B & 234C is not only consequential but is mandatory in nature. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Special Court Act, 1992 has not ruled out the provisions of Section 234A,234B & 234C being not applicable to the notified persons or they are exempt from the liability of payment of interest under these section of Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. The appellant craves to leave, to add, to amend and / ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd for both the AYs.and it reads as under: 1. The Ld. (A) ought to have appreciated that as per the decision of Hon'ble Special Court dated 30.04.2010 in MP No.41 of 1999, the assets under consideration and the consequential income belongs to Shri Harshad S. Mehta and hence the income assessed by the Assessing Officer ought to have been taxed in the hands of Shri Harshad S. Mehta and not in the hands of the appellant. Vide her letters dated 18.09.2013,assessee made a request to admit the additional ground.We find that similar additional ground was raised in the case of Hitesh Mehta for the AY.1994-95, 1995-96,2001-02 and 2008-09 (ITA No. 5587 to 5589/Mum/2011 and 5068/Mum/2011)and in the case of Pratima H. Mehta for the AYs.2005-06 to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e followed by every authority Therefore in our view, no direction is to be required to be given to the AO in this respect because if the Hon'ble Apex Court decides that all the income belongs to Shri Harshad S. Mehta, then the income has to be assessed in the hands of Shri Harshad S. Mehta, not in the hands of any other person.Therefore, in our view, there is no need to issue any direction as the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has to be followed in any case,Accordingly by admitting the grounds raised by the assessee for all the years,we treat the same as academic in nature." Following the above,we admit the additional ground for both the AYs.-treating the same as academic in nature. Details of dates of filing of returns,incomes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns of the assessee and the order passed by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of M/s.Orient Travel Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No.6868/Mum/2008-AY 2004-05),Pallvi Holding,Topaz Holding and Harsh Estate Pvt. Ltd.and other cases of Harshad Mehta group, he held that assessee did not have control over the her funds/assets,that she could not be held as defaulter for failure in payment of advance tax.Accordingly,he directed the AO to delete the interest levied u/s 234 of the Act. 2.2.Beforeus,Departmental Representative (DR) relied upon the order of theAO.Authorised Representative(AR)submitted that same issue had arisen in the cases of Hitesh Mehta and Pratima Mehta for different AYs.,that said ground was set aside to the file of the FAA for re- adjudication b....