DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE- 6, NEW DELHI V. SAHARA INDIA LTD., LUCKNOW

MA 285/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Revenue's appeal against the ITAT's earlier decision, which dismissed the Revenue's appeals concerning the income assessments for the years 1989-90 and 1991-92 for Sahara India Ltd. The Revenue contended that the ITAT had incorrectly quoted the directions of the CIT(Appeals) in their decision. The Tribunal, after reviewing the submissions and the records, concluded that there was no mistake apparent from the record in their previous orders and dismissed the miscellaneous applications.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26075 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANAND BHASKAR

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIALMEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Miscellaneous Application Nos.285 & 286/Del/2023 ( Arising out of ITA Nos.1350 & 1351/Del/2013 ) Assessment Years: 1989-90 &1991-92 DCIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi. Vs. Sahara India Ltd., 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow PAN :AADCS4482J (Applicant) (Respondent) ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTNT MEMBER: Both the miscellaneous applications filed by the Revenue states that the ITAT had dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue by quoting wrongly the directions of the Ld. CIT(Appeals). 2. In its MA 285 and 286, it is stated that the ITAT’s order dated 23.01.2023 in ITA Nos. 1350 & 1351/Del/2023has considered the facts of ITA No.1350& 1351/Del/2013 for the assessment year 1989-90 and 1991-92. Department by N o n e Respondent by Shri Anand Bhaskar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 21.02.2025 Date of pronouncement 13.03.2025 2 MA Nos. 285& 286/Del./2023 2.1 The Revenue in its submission has stated that in this case, the assessment for AY 1989-90 was completed on 28.02.1992 at a total income of Rs.4,95,61,714/-. Again order u/s 143(3)/251 was passed on 25.10.1994 determining total income at Rs.2,18,23,380. Appeal was preferred before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) which was decided vide order dated 29.09.1995 and income was computed at Rs.1,00,77,350. The assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide order dated 31.05.2005 decided the issue and thereafter, the income was computed at Rs (-) 19,65,597/-. 3. It is further stated that subsequently, the AO went in appeal before CIT(A) and CIT(A) passed the order dated 04.12.2012 and directed AO to verify the figures as claimed by Assessee and adopt the net loss of Rs. 6,87,98,743/- 4. Now, while disposing of Revenue's appeal, Hon'ble ITAT in ITA no 1350 & 1351/Del/2013 has observed that \"The CIT (A) has directed the AO to verify the aforementioned calculation by the assessee and if found correct allow impugned loss. Considering the facts in totality in the light of the subsequent decisions in the case of Assessee we do not find any error or infirmity in the aforementioned directions of the CIT(A), the appeal of the revenue is accordingly dismissed”. 5. In this regard it may be appreciated that CIT (A) has not mentioned in his order that 'if found correct', the loss is to be 3 MA Nos. 285& 286/Del./2023 allowed. This phrase 'if found correct' has been inadvertently read by ITAT in the order of CIT (A) and same is a mistake apparent from record. Accordingly, it is requested that Hon'ble ITAT may decide the matter in the light of these facts and give it's directions and decide the issue on merits as contended by Revenue. 6. The ld AR, per contra, states that there is no mistake apparent from record for invoking section 254(2). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and materials on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has directed the Assessing Officer to verify the figures as per Assessing Officer and as per assessee and adopt net loss of Rs 6,87,98,743/- in place of net loss of Rs 19,62,597/-. We find that the ITAT, in its order dated 23.01.2023 has merely paraphrased the directions of the CIT(A) and has echoed the direction of the CIT(A) i.e., to verify the calculations furnished by the assessee and if the same is found correct, the computed loss be allowed. 8. We find that there is no mistake in the directions of the ITAT and hence the miscellaneous applications filed by the Revenue are without any basis. Accordingly, this MA No.285/Del/2023 is dismissed. 9. The other MA no 386 pertains to AY 1991-92 and has identical facts though with different figures. The decision above applies to this MA also and the same is therefore dismissed. 4 MA Nos. 285& 286/Del./2023 10. In the result, Revenue’s both miscellaneous application nos. 285 & 286/Del/23 are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 13th March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (NAVEEN CHANDRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 13th March, 2025. Mohan Lal Copy forwarded to: 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "