ACIT, CHENNAI V. Tamilnadu State Apex Co-operative Bank Ltd., CHENNAI

MA 111/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2263 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 08-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 11-07-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S DASGUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: R VISWANATHAN
• Keywords: Rectification of order

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO. 111/MDS/2014 ( IN ITA NO. 948/MDS/2013 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE-IX, CHENNAI-6 (PETITIONER) VS M/S.TAMILNADU STATE APEX CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NEW NO.4, OLD NO.23, TNSC BANK BUILDING, NSC BOSE ROAD, CHENNAI-1 [PAN: AAAAT 4483 D] (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI S.DAS GUPTA, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.VISWANATHAN, FCA DATE OF HEARING : 11-07-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08-09-2014 O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, J.M: THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE R EVENUE SEEKING RECTIFICATION OF ORDER DT. 21-01-2014. THE LD.DR POINTED OUT THAT IN PARA NO.6 OF THE ORDER AT PAGE NO.6, TH E TRIBUNAL HAS OBSERVED, THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED AN AMOUNT O F M.P. NO. 111/M DS/2014 :- 2 -: ` 2.52 CRORES (WHICH IS 7.5% OF THE GROSS TOTAL INCOM E) AS DEDUCTION U/S.36(1)(VII)(A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREIN AFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). WHEREAS, THE ASSE SSEE HAD MADE PROVISIONS FOR NPA OF ` 2,27,31,658/- ONLY. THE AMOUNT ` 2.52 CRORES IS WRONGLY MENTIONED, IT IS TO BE SUBSTITUTE D WITH ` 2,27,31,658/-. THERE IS FACTUAL ERROR IN THE ORDER WHICH REQUIRES RECTIFICATION. 2. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI R.VISWANATHAN, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT CORRECT AMOUN T HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN THE ORDER. THEREFORE, NO RECTIFICATIO N IS WARRANTED AS POINTED OUT BY THE REVENUE. 3. BOTH SIDES HEARD. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION OF ` 2.52 CRORES ( ` 2,52,02,169/-). THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN HIS ORDER WHILE CONFIR MING THE FINDINGS OF ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO MENTIONED THE AMOUNT AS ` 2,52,02,169/-. IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE AMOUNT. HOWEVER, IN GRO UNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE AS SESSEE HAS M.P. NO. 111/M DS/2014 :- 3 -: STATED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE PROVISIONS OF ` 2,27,37,658/- DEBITED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE EXACT AMOUNT IS NOT FORTHCOMING FROM THE DOCUME NTS PLACED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE ONLY CORRECTION SOUGHT IN THE ORDER IS WITH RESPECT TO AMOUNT OF PROVISION MADE BY THE ASS ESSEE. WE GRANT LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO TRANSPOSE THE CORRECT AMOUNT AFTER ASCERTAINING THE FACTS FROM THE RECORD S OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS MADE CLEAR, THAT IF CHANGE IN THE AMOUNT AS PRAYED FOR IS NECESSITATED, IT WILL HAVE NO BEARING ON THE FINAL DECISION OF THE APPEAL. THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED IN THE AFORESAID TERMS. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY, THE 08 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) (VIK AS AWASTHY) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 08 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 TNMM COPY TO: (1) PETITIONER (4) CIT(A) (2) RESPONDENT (5) D.R. (3) CIT (6) G.F.