TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 169
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith Mr. Abhishek Gupta and Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Advocates. O R D E R CM APPL. 14886/2019 (exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. ITA 327/2019 and CM APPL. 14885/2019 (stay) 2. The Revenue is in appeal against an order dated 19th September 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('ITAT') in ITA No.4929/Del/2018 for the Assessment Year ('AY') 2011-12. 3. The Revenue ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se was before the ITAT. The cause title of the impugned order of the ITAT itself reflects that against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT (A)], two separate appeals had to be filed. One on behalf of the AOP represented by Deepali 'as alleged member' and the other by Deepali in its name again expressly stating that it was 'alleged' to be a member of the AOP. 6. The impugned....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order itself would have to be revisited not only to determine whether in fact Deepali was still a member of the AOP and, therefore, liable to be proceeded against for the tax liability of the AOP and further on merits whether the assessment had to be of the AOP minus Deepali. 7. Learned counsel for the Revenue repeatedly urged before the Court that in separate proceedings following an Arbitral A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....there is no outstanding demand in view of the ITAT having set aside the assessment order against the AOP. 9. The Court sees no reason why in the present proceedings, the Court should express any view on the above order of the Department passed under Section 281B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act'). It will be open to the Department to take whatever measures it considers appropriate in that regard....