ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE V. VIMAL TODI, INDORE

MA 22/IND/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue against Shri Vimal Todi concerning a penalty order for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The Revenue sought to recall the ITAT's earlier order which had quashed the penalty as time-barred. The ITAT initially considered a common fact for three assessment years but later acknowledged a mistake regarding the specific timeline for AY 2012-13, where the original reference for penalty imposition was withdrawn and reissued on a different date. Consequently, the Tribunal recalled the earlier order for AY 2012-13 and directed a fresh hearing. The second M/A was dismissed as it was a duplicate of the first.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775213 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 30-04-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: FORASSESSEERESPONDENTRAISEDA; FORASSESSEECOULDNOT; FORREVENUEAPPLICANTSUBMITTEDTHATTHIS; SHRIASHISHPORWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRIVENUSRAWKA

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 4 आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौरɊायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA No.19 & 22/Ind/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.188/Ind/2024 ) Assessment Year: 2012-13 DCIT, Central-2 Indore बनाम/ Vs. Shri Vimal Todi, 105, Darshan Residency, 104-105, Anand Bazar, Baikunthdham, Indore (Revenue/Applicant) (Assessee/Respondent) PAN: AFYPT0164P Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Assessee by Shri Venus Rawka, AR Date of Hearing 29.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 02.09.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: These two (2) Misc. Applications [“M/A”] u/s 254(2) of Income-tax Act, 1961 are filed by Revenue seeking re-call of Order dated 25.10.2024 of ITAT, Indore Bench in ITA No. 188/Ind/2024 [“impugned order”] for assessment- year [“AY”] 2012-13. 2. Heard the learned Representatives of both sides and case records perused. Printed from counselvise.com Shri Vimal Todi M/A No. 19 & 22/Ind/2025 – AY 2012-13 Page 2 of 4 M/A No. 19/Ind/2025: 3. At the start of hearing, Ld. AR for assessee/respondent raised a preliminary objection that the disputed amount of penalty involved in present matter is Rs. 50,00,000/-, which is less than the money limit prescribed in CBDT Circulars for filing of appeals by revenue. He submitted that the present M/A filed by revenue therefore deserves to be dismissed as non-maintainable as per CBDT Circular. However, the present matter by revenue is by way of M/A u/s 254(2) and the Ld. AR for assessee could not substantiate his objection. Therefore, the objection raised by Ld. AR is dismissed being meritless. 4. Thereafter, learned Representatives of both sides made their vehement submissions on the issued raised in M/A. After deliberations, it emerged that by means of impugned order, the ITAT has quashed penalty-order dated 29.12.2023 passed by AO as time-barred taking into account a common fact for three AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 that the AO made reference to Competent Officer for imposition of penalty on 13.06.2018 [Para 8(ii) of ITAT’s order]. However, the factual position for AY 2012-13 under consideration was different in as much as the original reference dated 13.06.2018 was withdrawn because the AY 2011-12 was mistakenly referred therein and a new reference dated 25.03.2019 for correct AY 2012-13 was made by AO to the Competent Officer. Ld. DR for revenue/applicant submitted that this correct fact might not have been placed before ITAT since there was a common hearing of three years and in any case, there is an apparent Printed from counselvise.com Shri Vimal Todi M/A No. 19 & 22/Ind/2025 – AY 2012-13 Page 3 of 4 mistake in the order of ITAT due to non-consideration of correct fact rendering the impugned order fit for rectification u/s 254(2). Hence, the order passed by ITAT may be re-called. On a careful consideration, we find that there is an apparent mistake in the impugned order as narrated. Therefore, we re-call the order of ITAT for AY 2012-13. The registry is directed to re-list the original appeal being ITA No. ITA No. 188/Ind/2024 for AY 2012-13 for a fresh hearing before regular bench after giving proper notices to parties. Accordingly, this M/A is allowed. M/A No. 22/Ind/2025: 5. Ld. Representatives of both sides are ad idem that this is a duplicate M/A of first M/A No. 19/Ind/2025. This has been inadvertently filed against the very same order of ITAT, therefore deserves to be dismissed. Taking into account this consensual submission of parties, this M/A is dismissed. 6. Resultantly, the M/A No. 19/Ind/2025 is allowed and M/A No. 22/Ind/2025 is dismissed. Order pronounced in open court on 02/09/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore िदनांक/Dated : 02/09/2025 Patel/Sr. PS Printed from counselvise.com Shri Vimal Todi M/A No. 19 & 22/Ind/2025 – AY 2012-13 Page 4 of 4 Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore Printed from counselvise.com "