Pradeep Dayanand Kothari, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

MA 109/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0134 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 21-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R VENKATESH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Period of limitation

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI . , . . , BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P.GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU R.L. REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NOS.108 & 109/CHNY/2018 (IN ITA NO.1302 & 1303/CHNY/2015) '# # /ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2006-07 SHRI PRADEEP DAYANAND- KOTHARI, KOTHARI BUILDINGS, 4 TH FLOOR, 114, M.G.ROAD, CHENNAI-34. VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-II(4), CHENNAI. [PAN: A EEPK 6866 L ] ( & /APPELLANT) ( '(& /RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : MR. R. VENKATESH, CA DEPARTMENT BY : MR. ARV.SREENIVASAN, JCIT ) /DATE OF HEARING : 27.07.2018 ) /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.09.2018 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU R.L. REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER : BY MEANS OF PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS, THE D EPARTMENT SEEKS TO RECTIFY THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NOS.1302 & 1303/CHNY/2015 FOR THE AYS 2007-08 & 2006-07 RESPEC TIVELY. 2. AT THE OUTSET, AS PER THE PRESENT PRACTICE FOLLO WED BY THE TRIBUNAL, THE APPEAL ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AND T HE TIME LIMIT FOR FILING MISCELLANEOUS PETITION RECKONED FROM THE END OF THE MONTH, IN WHICH, MP NO.108 & 109/CHNY/2018 (IN ITA NO.1302 & 1303/CHNY/2015) :- 2 -: ORDER WAS PASSED I.E. SIX MONTHS FOR SEEKING RECALL I.E. PARTIES ARE ENTITLED TO SEEK RECTIFICATION OF THE SAID ORDER WITHIN SIX MONTHS U/S.254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, AS AMENDED W.E.F. 01.06.2016 WHICH READS AS UNDER: (2) THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MAY, AT ANY TIME WITHIN 17 [SIX MONTHS FROM THE END OF THE MONTH IN WHICH THE ORDER WAS PASSED], WITH A VI EW TO RECTIFYING ANY MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD, AMEND ANY ORDER PASSED BY IT UNDER SUB-SECTION (1), AND SHALL MAKE SUCH AMENDMENT IF THE MISTAKE IS BRO UGHT TO ITS NOTICE BY THE ASSESSEE OR THE ASSESSING OFFICER : PROVIDED THAT AN AMENDMENT WHICH HAS THE EFFECT OF ENHANCIN G AN ASSESSMENT OR REDUCING A REFUND OR OTHERWISE INCREASING THE LIABI LITY OF THE ASSESSEE, SHALL NOT BE MADE UNDER THIS SUB-SECTION UNLESS THE APPELLATE TR IBUNAL HAS GIVEN NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE OF ITS INTENTION TO DO SO AND HAS ALLOWED THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD : PROVIDED FURTHER THAT ANY APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS SUB-SECTION ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 1998, SHALL BE ACC OMPANIED BY A FEE OF FIFTY RUPEES. 3. THE ABOVE MENTIONED PROVISION EMPOWERS THE TRIBU NAL TO SUMOTO RECTIFICATION ITS MISTAKE OR ENABLE THE PARTIES TO HEAR OR TO SEEK RECTIFICATION WITHIN THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION I.E. SIX MONTHS IN WHICH THE ORDER WAS PASSED. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ORDER W AS PASSED/PRONOUNCED ON 27.04.2016 AND FROM THE END OF THE MONTH, THE PE RIOD OF SIX MONTHS EXPIRES ON 26.10.2016. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRES ENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS ON 21.03.2018 TO RECTIFY THE MISTAKES. H OWEVER, LD.COUNSEL FOR THE DEPARTMENT SUBMITTED THAT THE PROCEDURES AS WEL L AS PERIOD OF LIMITATION SET OUT IN THE ACT OR MAINLY INTENDED TO SUB-SERVE THE INTEREST OF THE PARTIES AND IN TAX MATTER, IT CANNOT BE CONSIDE RED AS IT LIES BETWEEN IN TWO PARTIES BUT ONLY TAX ADJUSTMENT. MP NO.108 & 109/CHNY/2018 (IN ITA NO.1302 & 1303/CHNY/2015) :- 3 -: 4. THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT HAS STRONGLY OPPO SED THIS PROPOSITION AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE PETITION WAS FILED AFTER TIME LIMIT SPECIFIED IN SEC.254(2) OF THE ACT AND PLEADE D THAT THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED IN VIEW OF THE STATU TE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. 6. THE TIME LIMIT FOR FILING OF MISCELLANEOUS PETIT IONS STANDS ENDED BY 26.10.2016 SINCE THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT PET ITIONS ON 21.03.2018, WHICH IS CLEARLY BEYOND THE TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED U NDER THE ACT. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE PETITIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. ACCORDING LY, MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 6 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018, IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( ABRAHAM P.GEORGE ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . . ) ( DUVVURU R.L. REDDY ) ' /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, . /DATED: SEPTEMBER 06, 2018. TLN MP NO.108 & 109/CHNY/2018 (IN ITA NO.1302 & 1303/CHNY/2015) :- 4 -: ) ''/0 10 /COPY TO: 1. & /APPELLANT 4. 2 /CIT 2. '(& /RESPONDENT 5. 0 ''' /DR 3. 2 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. # /GF