ANSHU GARG,MATHURA V. INCOME TAX OFICER 1(3)(1), MATHURA

MA 11/AGR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves a miscellaneous application filed by Anshu Garg against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra Bench, which had previously disposed of his appeal for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeal was initially dismissed due to the absence of the assessee's representative at the hearing, despite the representative having submitted written submissions and a paper book. The assessee argued that the Tribunal's order contained a mistake apparent on record as it incorrectly stated that no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. The Department of Revenue opposed the application, asserting that there was no mistake apparent on record. The Tribunal reviewed the submissions and documents and concluded that the previous Bench had adequately considered all materials presented, leading to the dismissal of the miscellaneous application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 793353 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2025
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: M.M. AGRAWAL

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘DB’ : AGRA. BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA No.11/AGR/2025 (in ITA No.13/AGR/2025) (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Anshu Garg, vs. Income Tax Officer 1(3)(1), 34, Majyur Vihar, Dholi Piyau, Mathura. Mathura 281 001 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : ABDPG8739J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri M.M. Agrawal, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.08.2025 Date of Order : 26.09.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM : 1. This misc. application is filed by the Applicant/Assessee against the order of the Tribunal in ITA No.13/AGR/2015 dated 24.06.2025 for Assessment Year 2018-19 for rectifying the mistakes apparent on record. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the ITAT Bench disposed off the appeal of the assessee with the observation that none appeared on behalf of the assessee, however at the time of hearing of the assessee, adjournment was rejected and the Bench proceeded to dispose off the appeal by observing that heard both the parties, ld. AR of the assessee filed copies of bank statement and other relevant documents in support of his submissions. Printed from counselvise.com 2 MA No.11/AGR/2025 Since these documents were not available with the lower authorities, accordingly the matter was remanded back to the AO to verify the evidences submitted by the assessee, accordingly allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee for statistical purposes. He submitted that he has present himself at the time of hearing and made the detailed submissions by filing a written submissions as well as paper book. He submitted that the order passed by the ITAT contains mistake apparent on record and the order should be recalled. He brought to our attention to the paper book filed by the assessee at the time of hearing. 3. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue objected to the above submissions and submitted that there is no mistake apparent on record, therefore, the MA should not be entertained. 4. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observe that the coordinate Bench has considered the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee, written submissions as well as certain additional documents filed in the form of paper book. The Bench has inadvertently not recorded the name of the counsel in the body of the order and recorded that none appeared on behalf of the assessee and neither recorded none for the assessee and rejected the adjournment application. Before us, ld. AR of the assessee claims that he has argued the case in person. After considering the factual matrix of the record, we observe that the coordinate Bench has considered the written submissions filed by the ld. AR of the assessee and also additional documents filed along Printed from counselvise.com 3 MA No.11/AGR/2025 with written submissions supporting the case of the assessee. Since the coordinate Bench has already considered the written submissions filed by the assessee, it does not make any difference whether the ld. AR of the assessee has made the submissions in person since the same submissions were considered by the coordinate Bench which was in the form of written submissions. We also observe that coordinate Bench has considered the written submissions as well as materials placed on record in the form of paper book and came to the conclusion that these materials were not available with the lower authorities, therefore, for the sake of complete justice, these papers were remitted back to the file of AO to redo the assessment after considering the various materials filed by the assessee in the form of paper book and allowed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. Merely because the submissions of the assessee in person are not considered by the coordinate Bench, the factual matrix and facts available on record cannot be different. Therefore, the request of the ld. AR seems to review of the order of the Bench. Therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee and accordingly, misc. application filed by the assessee is dismissed. 5. In the result, the misc. application filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 26 day of September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 26.09.2025/TS Printed from counselvise.com 4 MA No.11/AGR/2025 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals). 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "