JANTA ADARSH CO-OPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,NEW DELHI V. ITO,WARD-52(1), NEW DELHI

MA 337/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Janta Adarsh Co-operative Urban Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., the appellant, who filed a Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking rectification of an oversight in the Tribunal's previous order. The oversight pertained to the non-adjudication of ground no. 8 in the appeal for the assessment year 2020-21, which was not addressed in the Tribunal's earlier decision that consolidated appeals for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2020-21. The Tribunal acknowledged the error and recalled the previous order to specifically address the unadjudicated ground.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312124 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िदʟी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िदʟी ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MA No. 337/Del/2024 (Arising out of ITA No. 3693/DEL/2023, A.Y. 2020-21) Janta Adarsh Co-operative Urban Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Chamber No. 2, Ground Floor, Tax Building, ...... आवेदक/Applicant Eastern Court, Janpath, New Delhi 110001 PAN: AAABT-3458-M बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-52(1), Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi 110002 ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent आअसं.3693/िदʟी/2023(िन.व. 2020-21) ITA No. 3693/DEL/2023 (A.Y.2020-21) Janta Adarsh Co-operative Urban Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Chamber No. 2, Ground Floor, Tax Building, ...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant Eastern Court, Janpath, New Delhi 110001 PAN: AAABT-3458-M बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-52(1), Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi 110002 ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent आवेदक/Applicant by : Shri Rajiv Kumar Jain, Chartered Accountant ŮितवादीȪारा/Respondent by : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 02/05/2025 घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 02/05/2025 2 MA No.337/DEL/2024 ITA No. 3693/Del/2023 (AY 2020-21) आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the assessee/applicant u/s. 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) seeking rectification in the order of Tribunal dated 28.06.2024 vide which appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 3693/Del/2023 for AY 2020-21 was decided. 2. Shri Rajiv Kumar Jain, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that while adjudicating appeal of the assessee, the Tribunal inadvertently failed to decide ground no. 8 of appeal. The Tribunal vide order dated 28.06.2024 decided two appeals of the assessee i.e. ITA No. 3692 & 3963/Del/2023 for AYs 2018-19 and 2020-21, respectively. Since, the issues raised in both appeals were similar, the appeal of the assessee for later assessment year i.e. AY 2020-21 was decided following the decision rendered in ITA No. 3692/Del/2023 for AY 2018-19. However, ground no. 8 of appeal in AY 2020-21 is not common grounds raised in AY 2018-19, therefore it remained to be adjudicated. 3. Shri Om Prakash, representing the department fairly stated that ground no. 8 of appeal raised in appeal by the assessee for AY 2020-21 in ITA No. 3693/Del/2023 has not been decided by the Tribunal. 4. Both sides heard. I find that the Tribunal while adjudicating the appeals of the assessee in ITA No. 3692 & 3693/Del/2023 (supra) vide single order decided appeal of the assessee, however, ground no. 8 raised in ITA No. 3693/Del/2023 for AY 2020- 21 remain to be decided. This is a mistake apparent on record that requires rectification. Therefore, order dated 28.06.2024 in ITA No. 3693/Del/2023 for AY 3 MA No.337/DEL/2024 ITA No. 3693/Del/2023 (AY 2020-21) 2020-21 is recalled for limited purpose of adjudication of ground no. 8 of appeal. The ground no. 8 of appeal which requires adjudication reads as under:- “8. That, without prejudice to ground No. 1 to 3, on the facts, the case the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has grossly erred in law in not disposing of following Ground No. 7: \"That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the AU has grossly erred in determining Rs. 25,28,856/- the sum payable u/s 156 of the Act in consequence of the impugned assessment, in as much as the tax has been computed on Rs. 57,76,910/- whereas the total income has been assessed at Rs. 5,42,880/-. Without prejudice, prayed that the demands deserves to be modified and cancelled.\" 5. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 3693/Del/2023 for AY 2020-21 6. The appeal of the assessee was decided by the Tribunal vide order dated 28.06.2024. These was a mistake apparent in the said order as ground of appeal no. 8 remained to be adjudicated. The said order was recalled in MA No.337/Del/2024 for limited purpose of adjudicating ground no. 8. 7. After deciding Miscellaneous Application of the assessee whereby order dated 28.06.2024 in ITA No. 3693/Del/2023 was recalled for limited purpose, with the consent of rival sides the appeal is taken up for adjudication of ground no. 8 of appeal. Representatives of both sides unanimously agreed that ground no. 8 raised in appeal for AY 2020-21 can be decided and are ready to make submissions. 4 MA No.337/DEL/2024 ITA No. 3693/Del/2023 (AY 2020-21) 8. Shri Rajiv Kumar Jain, appearing on behalf of the assessee stated that in ground no. 8 of appeal, the assessee has assailed that at the time of passing of assessment order dated 19.09.2012 the income of assessee has been assessed at Rs.5,42,880/-, whereas, in computation sheet of even date tax has been computed on gross total income of Rs.57,76,910/-. Thus, there is mismatch between total income assessed and the income on which tax has been computed. The ld. Counsel pointed that this issue was raised in appeal before the CIT(A) as ground no. 7 of appeal. The CIT(A) failed to dispose off said ground of appeal. 9. Shir Om Prakash, representing the department fairly admitted that there appears to be some mistake in computation of tax liability as the assessed income in Computation Sheet is different from total income of the assessee Rs.5,42,878/- mentioned in the assessment order. 10. Both sides heard. The short issue for adjudication raised in ground no. 8 of appeal is the error in computation of tax liability of the assessee for AY 2020-21. The ld. Counsel for the assessee/appellant has pointed that the assessment has been completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, assessing total income of the assessee at Rs.5,42,880/-, whereas, tax liability has been computed on gross total income of Rs.57,76,910/-. The discrepancy in computing tax liability is apparent writ large. In Computation Sheet dated 19.09.2022 placed on record, gross total income of the assessee is shown as Rs.57,76,910/- on which tax liability has been computed. Whereas, as per assessment order, the total assessed income of the assessee is Rs.5,42,880/-. This issue is restored to the AO for re-computation of tax liability in accordance with income assessed as per assessment order dated 19.09.2022 for AY 2020-21. The ground no. 8 of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose. 5 MA No.337/DEL/2024 ITA No. 3693/Del/2023 (AY 2020-21) 11. With the aforesaid findings on ground no. 8 of appeal, there is no change in final outcome of appeal of the assessee for AY 2020-21. Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on Friday the 02nd day of May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) ᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िदʟी / Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 02/05/2025 NV/- ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant , 2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A) 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी 5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI) "