IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, J.M. AND SHRI R.C.SHARM A, A.M. PAN NO. : AAACI3900 J I.T.A.NO. 504/IND/2010 A.Y. : 2004-05 INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INDORE. VS 5(1), INDORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI ANIL KHANDELWAL, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ARUN DEWAN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 15.09.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.09.2011 O R D E R PER R. C. SHARMA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-II,INDORE, DATED 31.05.2010 PASSED U/S 15 4 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED FOR REJECTION OF APPLICAT ION FILED U/S 154 OF THE ACT, SEEKING RECTIFICATION IN ORDER PASSED -: 2: - 2 BY CIT(A) ABOUT SOURCE OF CREDIT IN DEPOSITORS BAN K ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO AGGRIEVED FOR LEVY OF COST OF RS. 25,000/- ON THE ASSESSEE. 3. IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE THAT THERE WAS MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). OUR ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TO PAGE 6, PARA 3.3 OF THE CIT( A)S ORDER, WHEREIN IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS CLEARING OF RS. 1,87,200/- ON 6.9.2003, WHICH WAS ADVANCED TO THE A SSESSEE COMPANY. THE SOURCE OF THIS CREDIT WAS NOT AVAILABL E ON RECORD. AS PER LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, THERE IS A MISTAKE IN THIS PART OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER IN SO FA R AS AMOUNT OF RS. 1,87,200/- WAS RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT OF DIVIDEND. OUR ATTENTION WAS ALSO DRAWN TO THE LETTER DATED 21.8.2 003 OF I.F.F., OVERSEAS PRIVATE LIMITED, ACCORDING TO WHIC H DIVIDEND OF RS. 1,87,200/- WAS PAID TO SHRI MANSI MEWARA MAH ESHWARI VIDE CHEQUES DRAWN ON STATE BANK OF INDORE, INDUSTR IAL FINANCE BRANCH, INDORE. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, CONTENTION OF LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE WAS THAT THERE WAS A MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), BUT THE SAME WAS NOT RECTIFIED BY HIM O N THE -: 3: - 3 APPLICATION FILED U/S 154 AND PENALTY OF RS. 25,000 /- WAS ALSO LEVIED ON ASSESSEE. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. SENIOR D.R. RELIED ON TH E ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AN D FOUND THAT THERE WAS NO MISTAKE MUCH LESS AN APPARENT MIS TAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). SCOPE OF SECTION 154 IS VE RY LIMITED AND SAME IS ENVISAGED TO RECTIFY AN APPARENT MISTAK E IN THE ORDER. SUCH POWER OF RECTIFICATION CANNOT BE EXERC ISED TO REVIEW THE ORDER PASSED. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DEALT I N DETAIL WITH ALL ASPECTS OF THE ISSUE WHILE REJECTING APPLICATIO N FILED U/S 154 AND ALSO ALLEGED THE ASSESSEE FOR MIS-CONDUCT. SO FAR AS ACTION OF THE CIT(A) FOR REJECTING APPLICATION U/S 154 IS CONCERNED, WE ARE IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH HIM. HOWEV ER, THE CASE IS NOT FIT FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY OF RS. 25 ,000/- ON THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) TO THE EXTENT OF REJECTING THE APPLICATION U /S 154 AND -: 4: - 4 DIRECT FOR CANCELLING THE PENALTY OF RS. 25,000/- I MPOSED ON THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D IN PART. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST SEPTEMBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) ( R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 21 ST SEPTEMBER, 2011. CPU* 1521