DCIT(EXEM) WARD1(1), MUMBAI V. ACIL NAVASAR JAN RURAL DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION, MUMBAI

MA 199/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves the Revenue seeking recall/rectification of an earlier Tribunal order dated 01.03.2024 concerning the assessment year 2015-16. The Revenue's Miscellaneous Application was found to be filed beyond the prescribed statutory period, leading to its rejection. The Tribunal noted that the application was not filed within the six-month period required by section 253(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which stipulates the timeframe for filing such applications from the date the order becomes known to the party.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 776498 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2025
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAVITA P. KAUSHIK
• Assessee Lawyers: ATIN MEHTA
• Keywords: Period of limitation

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) M.A. No. 199/Mum/2024 (Arising out of ITA No. 3743/MUM/2023) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dy. CIT (Exemption) -1 (1), 6th floor, MTNL Building Cumballa Hill Dr. G.D. Deshmukh Marg (Pedder Road), Mumbai-400026. Vs. ACIL Navasar Jan Rural Development Foundation, 408, New Udyog Mandir No. 2, Mogul Lane Mahim (West), Mumbai-400016. PAN NO. AAATA 0898 E Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Atin Mehta, CA Revenue by : Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 25/07/2025 Date of pronouncement : 15/09/2025 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM By way of this Miscellaneous Application, the Revenue is seeking recall/rectification of the order of the Tribunal dated 01.03.2024 passed in ITA No. 3734/Mum/2023 for assessment year 2015-16. 2. At the very threshold, it is necessary to notice that the Registry, vide its communication dated 18.06.2025, had pointed out a defect that the Miscellaneous Application was not filed by the Revenue within the prescribed period of limitation. Upon perusal of Printed from counselvise.com the record, it is evident that what was placed before the 07.08.2024 was merely an authorization memo issued by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption). For clarity, the said memo has been duly extracted in the order. ACIL Navasar Jan Rural Development Foundation the record, it is evident that what was placed before the 07.08.2024 was merely an authorization memo issued by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption). For clarity, the said memo has been duly extracted in the order. ACIL Navasar Jan Rural Development Foundation 2 MA No. 199/M/2024 the record, it is evident that what was placed before the Tribunal on 07.08.2024 was merely an authorization memo issued by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption). For clarity, the Printed from counselvise.com 2.1 It further emerges from the proceedings that during the course of hearing before us on 25.07.2025, the learned Departmental Representative produced, for the first time, a copy of the Miscellaneous Application. It is manifest that such application had not been filed within the statutory period. Under section 253(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the limitation prescribed for filing a Miscellaneous Application is six months from the end of the month in which the order of the Tribunal comes to the knowledge of the party concerned. 2.2 In the present case, the Miscellaneous Ap Revenue having been lodged beyond the prescribed period is clearly barred by limitation and, therefore, not maintainable in law. 3. In the result, the Miscellaneous Appli rejected as non-maintainable. Order pronounced in the open Court on Sd/ (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 15/09/2025 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. ACIL Navasar Jan Rural Development Foundation It further emerges from the proceedings that during the course hearing before us on 25.07.2025, the learned Departmental Representative produced, for the first time, a copy of the Miscellaneous Application. It is manifest that such application had not been filed within the statutory period. Under section 253(2) of tax Act, 1961, the limitation prescribed for filing a Miscellaneous Application is six months from the end of the month in which the order of the Tribunal comes to the knowledge of the In the present case, the Miscellaneous Application of the Revenue having been lodged beyond the prescribed period is clearly barred by limitation and, therefore, not maintainable in law. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application of the Revenue is maintainable. ounced in the open Court on 15/09/2025 Sd/- Sd/ KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIL Navasar Jan Rural Development Foundation 3 MA No. 199/M/2024 It further emerges from the proceedings that during the course hearing before us on 25.07.2025, the learned Departmental Representative produced, for the first time, a copy of the Miscellaneous Application. It is manifest that such application had not been filed within the statutory period. Under section 253(2) of tax Act, 1961, the limitation prescribed for filing a Miscellaneous Application is six months from the end of the month in which the order of the Tribunal comes to the knowledge of the plication of the Revenue having been lodged beyond the prescribed period is clearly barred by limitation and, therefore, not maintainable in law. cation of the Revenue is 5. Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Printed from counselvise.com Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// ACIL Navasar Jan Rural Development Foundation Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai ACIL Navasar Jan Rural Development Foundation 4 MA No. 199/M/2024 BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "