DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, GHAZIABAD V. FRIENDS LAND DEVELOPERS , GHAZIABAD

MA 64/DEL/2022

AI Insights

The case revolves around a Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue seeking rectification of an alleged mistake in the Tribunal's earlier order. The Revenue contended that the Tribunal had wrongly assumed jurisdiction over the case, which should have been addressed by the High Court as per section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal had previously entertained an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order, which was passed under section 250 of the Act. The Revenue's argument was that the Tribunal's jurisdiction was incorrectly applied, seeking a review rather than a rectification. The Tribunal dismissed the application, emphasizing that the Revenue's request fell outside the scope of rectification under section 254(2) of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 29214 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RUPINDER AGGARWAL
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 250; 254(2); 264

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िदʟी पीठ “बी”, िदʟी ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी Űजेश क ुमार िसंह, लेखाकार सद˟ क े समƗ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA No. 64/Del/2022 (Arising out of ITA No. 2778/Del/2018, A.Y 2014-15) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), R.no. 201, CGO-I, Hapur Chungi, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh ...... आवेदक/Applicant बनाम Vs. Friends land Developers, C/o Rupinder Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate, B-1A/22 1st Floor, Sector 51, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201301 PAN: AABFF-1343-A ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent आवेदक/Applicant by : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR ŮितवादीȪारा/Respondent by : Shri Rupinder Aggarwal, Advocate सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 01/11/2024 घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : 22/01/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the Revenue seeking rectification of alleged mistake in order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 2778/Del/2018 decided on 07.10.2021. 2 MA No.64/DEL/2022 2. Shri Om Prakash, representing the department submits that the Tribunal has wrongly acquired jurisdiction over the case in appeal against the order of CIT(A) as merit of the case has been decided by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax(in short ‘PCIT’) u/s. 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide order dated 09.12.2016. The correct remedy available to the assessee was to file Writ Petition before the Hon’ble High Court and not appeal against said order before the Tribunal. The ld. DR submitted that since the jurisdiction has been wrongly assumed by the Tribunal, order dated 07.10.2021(supra) be amended to rectify the mistake. 3. Per contra, Shri Rupinder Aggarwal appearing on behalf of the assessee vehemently opposed Miscellaneous Application of the Revenue. The ld. Counsel submits that the Revenue is seeking review of Tribunal order which is not permissible under the provisions of the Act. 4. Both sides heard. The Revenue is seeking rectification of mistake in the order of Tribunal dated 07.10.2021(supra). The contention of the Revenue is that the Tribunal wrongly exercised jurisdiction in entertaining appeal by the assessee against an order of the CIT(A) on a issue which has already been adjudicated by the PCIT u/s. 264 of the Act. The assessee had filed appeal against order of the CIT(A) passed u/s. 250 of the Act. As per provisions of section 253 of the Act, the Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner u/s. 250 of the Act. Hence, the contention of the Revenue that the Tribunal has erred in exercising its jurisdiction in entertaining appeal, is without any merit. The Revenue in the garb of rectification of mistake is seeking review of order which is beyond the scope of the provisions of the Act. In any case, the contention raised by Department cannot be 3 MA No.64/DEL/2022 subject of rectification u/s. 254(2) of the Act. In our considered view, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Department is misconceived. 5. Miscellaneous Application filed by the Department is dismissed being without any merit. Order pronounced in the open court on Wednesday the 22nd day of January, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (VIKAS AWASTHY) लेखाकार सद᭭य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िदʟी / Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 22/01/2025 NV/- ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant , 2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी 5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI) "