ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, DELHI V. DEEPAK AGARWAL, DELHI

MA 214/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves the Revenue's Miscellaneous Applications under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking rectification of the Tribunal's order dated 30.10.2024 concerning the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15. The Revenue contended that the Tribunal's earlier decision did not correctly reflect the facts of the case, particularly regarding the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for tax evasion. The Tribunal, however, found that the Revenue's application sought a review of the decision rather than rectification of any apparent mistakes, which is beyond the scope of section 254(2). The Tribunal dismissed the applications, affirming the original ruling.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717197 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR DHANESHTA
• Assessee Lawyers: KAPIL GOEL
• Keywords: Accommodation entries
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘H’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA Nos 212, 213 & 214/DEL/2024 (A/o ITA Nos. 1660, 1661 & 1659/DEL/2021 [A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2012-13]) The A.C.I.T Vs. Shri Deepak Agarwal Central Circle – 25 55, Meena Apartment, New Delhi I.P. Extension, Paharganj New Delhi PAN – ADKPA 0795 K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv Department By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhaneshta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 18.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 19.08.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- With this order we shall dispose of the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue u/s 254(2) of the Income tax Act, 1961 [for short, 'the Act'] for rectifying the mistakes apparent in the order of this Bench of the Tribunal dated 30.10.2024 for the above captioned A.Ys. Printed from counselvise.com 2 MA Nos 212, 213 & 214/DEL/2024 ([A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2012-13]) Shri Deepak Agarwal 2. The contents of the Miscellaneous Application read as under: “2 In this regard, the present Miscellaneous Application may be filed u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Hon'ble ITAT in ITA No. 1660/Del/2021 dated 06/10/2023 for A. Y. 2013-14 in the case of Deepak Aggarwal. 3. In its order dated 06/10/2023, the Hon'ble ITAT has restored the appeals of the assesse to the files of the AO and directed the AO to decide the levy of penalty afresh after considering all the appellate decision in the cases of recipients of the accommodation entries provided by the assesse, 4. The observation of the Hon'ble ITAT is not correct on the facts of the case. In this case, assesse has filed appeal before Hon'ble ITAT against the order u/s 271(1)(c) passed by Ld. CIT(A)-23, New Delhi and imposed penalty @100% of tax sought to be evaded tax amounting to Rs.28,80,720/-. 5. In view of the above, It is requested that Misc. Application may be accepted and kindly restore the appeals to the files of the Ld. CIT(A)-23, New Delhi who passed the penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act 1961 3. Supporting the contents of the MA, as mentioned hereinabove, the ld. DR vehemently stated that the Tribunal is not correct on the facts of the case. In this case, assesse has filed appeal before ITAT against the Printed from counselvise.com 3 MA Nos 212, 213 & 214/DEL/2024 ([A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2012-13]) Shri Deepak Agarwal order u/s 271(1)(c) passed by Ld. CIT(A)-23, New Delhi and imposed penalty @100% of tax sought to be evaded tax amounting to Rs.28,80,720/-. The ld. DR prayed for accepting the Miscellaneous Application. 4. Per contra, the ld. counsel for the assessee contended that each case is decided on facts of its own and the Tribunal has decided the issues on the facts of the case and, therefore, referring to the facts of the decisions of the coordinate bench in various cases, considering them at this stage, would amount to review of the order of the Tribunal, which is not permissible u/s 254(2) of the Act. It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the Revenue should point out factual errors as per provisions of law, which need to be rectified 5. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. On a careful perusal of the Miscellaneous Application, we do not find any error in the findings of the co-ordinate bench. At the very outset, the issues raised through these MAs, as mentioned elsewhere, itself show that the Revenue is seeking review of the order of the Tribunal. We find force in the contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee. The Tribunal has decided the issues on the Printed from counselvise.com 4 MA Nos 212, 213 & 214/DEL/2024 ([A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2012-13]) Shri Deepak Agarwal facts of the case in hand and, therefore, any reference to facts of decisions of the coordinate bench would amount to review of the order. In light of the aforesaid conclusion of the Tribunal, we do not find any merits in these MAs of the Revenue and the same are accordingly, dismissed. 4. In the result, all the three Miscellaneous Applications of the Revenue in MA No. 1659, 1660 and 1661/DEL/2024 stand dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 19.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [MADHUMITA ROY] [NAVEEN CHANDRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 19th AUGUST, 2025. VL/ Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com 5 MA Nos 212, 213 & 214/DEL/2024 ([A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2012-13]) Shri Deepak Agarwal Sl No. PARTICULARS DATES 1. Date of dictation of Tribunal Order 2. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictation Member 3. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the other Member 4. Date on which the approved draft Tribunal Order comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 5. Date on which the fair Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 6. Date on which the signed order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S 7. Date on which the final Tribunal Order is uploaded by the Sr. P.S./P.S. on official website 8. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk alongwith Tribunal Order 9. Date of killing off the disposed of files on the judiSIS portal of ITAT by the Bench Clerks 10. Date on which the file goes to the Supervisor (Judicial) 11. The date on which the file goes for xerox 12. The date on which the file goes for endorsement 13. The date on which the file goes to the Superintendent for checking 14. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the Tribunal order 15. Date on which the file goes to the dispatch section 16. Date of Dispatch of the Order Printed from counselvise.com "