DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), PUNE, PUNE V. RADIANT INDUSTRIES, PUNE

MA 288/PUN/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle \\u2013 2(1), Pune (Revenue) versus Radiant Industries, concerning the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16. The Revenue filed Miscellaneous Applications seeking to recall the Tribunal's consolidated order which had allowed the assessee's appeal, thereby altering the penalty provisions applicable for the specified assessment years. The Revenue contended that the Tribunal's order contained a mistake apparent from the record regarding the applicability of section 271AAB(1A) for penalties instead of section 271(1)(c), due to the timing of the search and seizure operation. The Tribunal, however, found no merit in the Revenue's arguments, both due to procedural limitations and substantive legal grounds.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712635 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Other Referred Cases: ITO Vs. Joshirao Engineering, ITO Vs. Madhuri Sunil Pandit, CIT (IT-4) Mumbai v. Reliance Telecom Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: Income-Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMNATH P MURKUNDE
• Assessee Lawyers: SUHAS P. BORA
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 271(1)(c); 139

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “बी” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHREE DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER धिधिि आिेदन सं. / MA Nos.288 & 287/PUN/2023 (Arising out of ITA Nos.243 & 244/PUN/2023) धनिाारण िर्ा / Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. CIT, Central Circle – 2(1), Pune Vs. Radiant Industries, Survey No. 32/4, Behind Relax Hotel, Old Mundhwa Road, Kharadi, Pune-411014 PAN : AAJFR9352D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Suhas P. Bora Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 09-05-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01-08-2025 आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : Both these Miscellaneous Applications of the Revenue seeks to recall the consolidated order of the Tribunal passed under section 254(1) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) in ITA Nos.243 & 244/PUN/2023 dated 12.04.2023 for the Assessment Years (“AYs”) 2014-15 and 2015-16. 2. The Revenue in its Miscellaneous Application(s) has raised the following contentions:- “May it please Your Honours The Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to allow the appeal of the assessee vide ITA No. 243 & 244/PUN/2023 dated 12/04/2023, by clarifying that penalty in the said case for AY 2014-15 & 2015-16 should be levied u/s 271AAB(1A) instead of Sec 271(1)(c) of Income-tax Act, 1961. However, in the said case as per the provisions of penalty u/s 271AAB (1A), the conditions of specified previous year are not applicable to this case for AY 2014-15 & 2015-16 as the Search and seizure action has been carried out on 19.01.2018. In penalty u/s 271AAB (1A) of the Act, specified previous year should be the previous year in which search is conducted and it also includes the previous year which has ended before the date of search but the date of furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of section 139 for such year has not expired before the date of search and the assessee has not furnished the return of income for the previous year before the date of search. Furthermore, the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable for Printed from counselvise.com 2 MA Nos.288 & 287/PUN/2023, AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16 concealment of particulars of income or fringe benefits or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or fringe benefits(applicable up to the AY 2016-17. All the provisions mentioned in penalty u/s 271(1)(c) are applicable to this case. 02. Therefore, it is humbly submitted that to this extent there is mistake apparent from record on the part of Hon'ble ITAT in its above referred order dated 12/04/2023. 03. In view of this, it is submitted that the order in ITA No. 243 & 244/PUN/2023 contains mistake apparent from record. Hence, it is prayed that the Hon'ble ITAT may be pleased to consider recalling the captioned order in the interest of Justice and passing suitable remedial order. 04. Further, this order of the Hon'ble ITAT was received by the O/o PCIT(C), Pune from the Hon'ble ITAT on 31.07.2023 and the approval of Miscellaneous Approval from PCIT was received in this office only on 30.10.2023. Therefore, it was impossible to file the miscellaneous application by the undersigned within the prescribed time limit of 31.10.2023. Hence, it is prayed that the Hon'ble ITAT may kindly condone the delay of one day in filing of the miscellaneous application.” 3. The Ld. DR at the time of hearing reiterated the above stated contentions made in the Miscellaneous Application(s) and requested to reconsider the issues decided in ITA Nos.243 & 244/PUN/2023 by condoning the delay in filing of the MAs and recalling the Tribunal’s order dated 12.04.2023 in light of the above contentions raised by the Department. 4. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, at the outset, relying on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Pune Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Joshirao Engineering in MA No. 274/PUN/2023 for AY 2018-19, dated 29.05.2024 and in the case of ITO Vs. Madhuri Sunil Pandit in MA No. 299/PUN/2023 for AY 2007-08, dated 29.05.2024 submitted that the Miscellaneous Application of the Revenue is not maintainable being barred by limitation. 4.1 On merits, referring to paragraph 3 of the impugned Tribunal’s order, he submitted that the Tribunal has passed a well reasoned order and therefore no interference is called for in the said order of the Tribunal. He further submitted that the contention of the Revenue in the said Miscellaneous Application is beyond the scope of Section 254(2) of the Act as there is no mistake apparent on record in the impugned order of the Tribunal. The Ld. AR argued that by way of this Miscellaneous Application the Revenue is seeking review of the Tribunal’s order in the garb of rectification which is not permissible under the law. Printed from counselvise.com 3 MA Nos.288 & 287/PUN/2023, AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16 5. We have heard both the parties, considered their arguments and perused the Tribunal’s order dated 12.04.2023 in the main appeal being ITA Nos.243 & 244/PUN/2023 for AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16. 6. It is an admitted fact that the Revenue has filed these Miscellaneous Applications with a delay of one day. Though the said delay is very minute, considering the relevant provisions of the Act and the legal position thereto, we are of the view that in the absence of any specific provision u/s 254(2), to condone the delay in filing of Miscellaneous Application, the delay cannot be condoned. The present Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue are therefore not maintainable being barred by limitation and therefore to be dismissed as such. 7. Let us now also deal with the Revenue’s Miscellaneous Application on merits in light of the relevant provisions of the Act and settled legal position. In exercise of powers under section 254(2) of the Act, the Tribunal may amend any order passed by it only to rectify any mistake apparent from the record. The Tribunal cannot revisit its earlier order and go into details on merit, which is beyond the scope and ambit of the power conferred under section 254(2) of the Act. 8. On perusal of the contents of the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue as well as the findings of the Tribunal in its order dated 12.04.2023 in ITA Nos.243 & 244/PUN/2023, we find it difficult to agree with the contentions of the Revenue. In our considered view, the Tribunal has allowed the appeal(s) of the by giving reasoning in detail (para 3 of the Tribunal’s order refers) after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and the relevant provisions of the Act. 9. The Revenue by way of the present Miscellaneous Applications is contending that the Tribunal’s order dated 12.04.2023 in ITA Nos.243 & 244/PUN/2023 may be recalled and suitable remedial order may be passed as there is an apparent mistake in the order of the Tribunal. We, however tend to agree with the contention of the Ld. AR that what the Revenue is actually seeking by way of this Miscellaneous Application is the review of the Tribunal’s order dated 12.04.2023 in ITA Nos.243 & 244/PUN/2023 in the garb of rectification which is not permissible under the law. Printed from counselvise.com 4 MA Nos.288 & 287/PUN/2023, AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16 10. It is a settled law that review in the garb of rectification is not permissible under section 254(2) of the Act. In the case of CIT (IT-4) Mumbai v. Reliance Telecom Ltd. (2021) 284 reported in taxman 517 (SC)/440 ITR 1 (SC), their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that while considering application under section 254(2) Tribunal is not required to revisit its original order and go in details on merits and completely recall its order as powers under section 254(2) are only to rectify/correct any mistake apparent from record. 11. In light of the above discussion and judicial precedent, we hold that there is no mistake apparent on record in the Tribunal’s order dated 12.04.2023 in ITA Nos.243 & 244/PUN/2023 calling for rectification of the same. Accordingly, the Miscellaneous Application(s) filed by the Revenue are dismissed. 12. In the result, both the Miscellaneous Application Nos. 288 & 287/PUN/2023 arising out of ITA Nos.243 & 244/PUN/2023 filed by the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 01st August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. Dipak P. Ripote) (Astha Chandra) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 01st August, 2025. रदि आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “बी” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. //सत्य दपि प्रदि// True Copy// आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, िररष्ठ दनजी सदचि / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "