Sri Mellacheruvu Veerambhotla Guptha, Narasaraopeta V. THE ITO., WARD-1, NARASARAOPET., Narasaraopeta

MA 1/VIZ/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1317 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 01-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K V N CHARYA
• Assessee Lawyers: A C GANGAIAH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISHAKHAPATNAM BEFORE S/SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH (AM) & SAKTIJIT DEY (JM) M.P.NO.01/VIZ/2013 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.64/VIZ/2012) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 MELLACHERUVU VEERAMBHOT L A GUPTHA, 39 - 07 - 43/11, ARUNDALPET, NARASARAOPETA. VS. ITO, WARD - 1, NARASARAOPET. PAN/GIR NO. : AFSPMM 5849 Q ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.C. GANGAIAH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.V.N. CHARYA DATE OF HEARING : 0 6/12/2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11 /12/2013 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM BY THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S.254(2) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE HAS PRAYED TO MODIFY THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRI BUNAL DATED 9.11.2012 IN I.T.A. NO.64/VIZ/2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 ON THE GR OUND THAT AN APPARENT MISTAKE WAS CREPT IN TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH REQUIRES MODIFICATION. 2. WE HAVE CONSIDERED SUBMISSIONS OF LD REPRESENTATIVES OF PARTIES AND ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AS WELL AS PERUSED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A. NO.64/VIZ/2012. ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL, IT IS SEEN THAT THE TRIBUNAL AFTER CONSIDERING THE CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES AND OTHER M ATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD HAS GIVEN ITS CONSIDERED 2 FINDING ON PRE ISSUE IN PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE ORDER . THE POWER OF RECTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 254 (2) CAN BE EXERCISED ONLY WHEN THE MISTAKE WHICH IS SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED IS AN OBVIOUS AND PATENT MISTAKE WHICH IS APPARENT FROM RECORD AND NOT A MISTAKE WHICH REQUIRES TO BE ESTABLISHED BY ARGUMENTS AND A LON G DRAWN PROCESS OF REASONING ON POINTS ON WHICH THERE MAY CONCEIVABLY BE TWO OPINIONS. THE POWERS SO CONFERRED U/S. 254 (2) DO NOT CONTEMPLATE REHEARING WHICH WOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF REWRITING AN ORDER AFFECTING THE MERITS OF THE CASE. CONSIDERING THE F ACTS OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE ARE BEYOND THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR RECALLING THE OR DER O F THE TRIBUNAL DT.9.11.2012 HAS NO MERIT AND THE SAME IS REJECTED . 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 1 /12/2013 . S D / - S D / - (B.RAMAKOTA IAH ) ( SAKTIJIT DEY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VISHAKHAPATNAM DATED 1 1 T H D E C E M B E R , 2 0 1 3 PARIDA , SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE : MELLACHERUVU VEERAMBHOTIA GUPTHA,39 - 07 - 43/11, ARUNDALPET,NARASARAOPETA 2. THE RESPONDENT. : ITO, WARD - 1,NARASARAOPET 3. THE CIT(A) - GUNTUR 4. CIT , GUNTUR. 5. DR, ITAT, VISHAKHAPATNAM 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR.PS, ITAT, VISHAKHAPATNAM //TRUE COPY//