M.V.Electronics, Narasaraopeta V. THE ITO , WARD - 1, Narasaraopeta

ITA 7/VIZ/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 80125 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D MANOJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: A C GANGAIAH
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 133A; 148; 54; 154

Judgement Text

ITA NO.7/VIZAG/2014 M.V. ELECTRONICS, NARASARAOPETA IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.7/VIZAG/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 M.V. ELECTRONICS NARASARAOPETA VS. ITO WARD-1 NARASARAOPETA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.AAJFM 0497J ASSESSEE BY: SHRI A.C. GANGAIAH, CA REVENUE BY: SHRI D. MANOJ KUMAR, ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 08.07.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.07.2014 ORDER PER BENCH:- THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 31.7.2013 OF THE CIT(A), GUNTUR REJECTING ASSESSEE S APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS SIX GR OUNDS OF APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON VARIOUS ISSU ES, BUT BASICALLY THE ISSUE BEFORE US IS WHETHER THE APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE CIT(A) IS MAINTAINABLE OR NOT. BRIEFLY THE FACTS ARE, THE AS SESSEE A PARTNERSHIP FIRM FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER DISPUTE ON 31.10.2004 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.9,760/-. T HE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY ON 29.10.2007 A SURVEY U/S 133A OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED IN THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE A SSESSEE. AS A RESULT OF SURVEY, THE ASSESSMENT WAS RE-OPENED BY ISSUING A N OTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, THE ASSESSING OFF ICER AFTER EXAMINING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND VARIOUS DETAILS OF THE ASSESS EE COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT BY MAKING A NUMBER OF ADDITIONS AS A RES ULT OF WHICH, TOTAL INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS.7,05,000/-. ITA NO.7/VIZAG/2014 M.V. ELECTRONICS, NARASARAOPETA 2 3. BEING AGGRIEVED OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SO PASSE D, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) AFT ER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE LIGHT OF THE MAT ERIALS ON RECORD CONFIRMED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL. AGA INST THE AFORESAID APPEAL ORDER PASSED, THE ASSESSEE FILED A PETITION U/S 154 OF THE ACT FOR RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE IN THE ORDER. IN THE RECTIFICATION PETI TION FILED U/S 154 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE AGAIN CHALLENGED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY STATING THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT GIVEN ANY REASONING WHILE UPHOLDING THE ADDITION. THE CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSE ES APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION DISMISSED THE SAME WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION: I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPEL LANT. THE POWER TO RECTIFY AN ORDER UNDER SECTION 154 IS LIMITED TO RECTIFYING A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE CIT (A), GUNTUR HAS PASSED A SPEAKING ORDER ON 13.11.2009 EXPLAINING THE REASONS WHY SHE HAS UPHELD THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE APPEL LANT HAS NOT POINTED OUT AN APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE ORDER BUT HAS CHALLENGED THE ORDER ON MERITS. THIS AMOUNTS TO AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT( A), GUNTUR AND SUCH APPEAL LIES WITH THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND NOT THE UNDERSIGNED. THE RECOURSE TO SECTION 154 BY THE APPELLANT IS MIS PLACED AND ITS APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION OF THE ORDER DATED 13.11.2009 STA NDS REJECTED. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIE S, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS OTHER MATERIA LS ON RECORD. ON A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER DATED 13.11.2009 PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IN APPEAL, IT IS VERY MUCH CLEAR THAT THE CIT(A) HAS CONSIDERED THE ISSUES IN RELATION TO EACH OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND AFTER EX AMINING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE MATERIALS ON RECORD HAS DECIDED THE SAME. IN THE RECTIFICATION PETITION, THE ASSESSEE HAS MERELY TRIED TO RE-ARGUE THE CASE AND SOUGHT REVIEW OF THE ORDER PASSED BY T HE LD. CIT(A). RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE AS ENVISAGED U/S 154(1) OF THE ACT IS IN RELATION TO MISTAKE APPARENT ON THE FACE OF RECORD. A PERUSAL OF THE RECTIFICATION PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS BEEN EXHAUSTIVELY E XTRACTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WILL GO TO SHOW THAT IN THE GAR B OF RECTIFICATION, THE ASSESSEE ACTUALLY SEEKS REVIEW OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A), WHICH, IN OUR VIEW IS BEYOND THE SCOPE AND AMBIT OF SECTION 1 54 OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE OR DER OF THE CIT(A) IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, ITA NO.7/VIZAG/2014 M.V. ELECTRONICS, NARASARAOPETA 3 WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) BY DISMISSING THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH JULY14 SD/- SD/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VG/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM, DATED 8 TH JULY, 2014 COPY TO 1 M.V. ELECTRONICS, C/O M.V. GUPTHA, 9-7-43/11, TOP FLOOR, M.V. TOWERS, ARUNDALPET, NARASARAOPETA. 2 ITO WARD-1, NARASARAOPETA. 3 THE CIT, GUNTUR 4 THE CIT(A), GUNTUR 5 THE DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 6 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM