S.S.N.Ravi, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

MA 111/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5680 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 07-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MURALI MOHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: K G RAGHUNATH

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CBENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P.NO.111/MDS/2017 ( ./ I.T.A. NO.933/MDS/2015) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-2009. SHRI. S.S.N. RAVI, C/O.K.G. RAGHUNATH, ADVOCATE, NO.35/15, SECOND STREET, SAIT COLONY, EGMORE CHENNAI 600 008. VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SALARY CIRCLE III, CHENNAI. [PAN AFDPR 0277C] ( PETITIONER ) (RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. K.G. RAGHUNATH, ADVOCATE !' / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. MURALI MOHAN, ADDL. CIT . # $% / DATE OF HEARING : 02.06.2017 &' $% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.06.2017 / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- BY THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, ASSESSEE SEEKS R ECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN M.P. NO.272/MDS/2016, DA TED 18 TH NOVEMBER, 2016 IN RELATION TO ITA NO.933/MDS/2015, DATED 06.0 5.2016. ON GOING THROUGH THE ORDER, WHICH IS UNDER CHALLENGE, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE 2 M.P. NO.111/MDS/2017 TRIBUNAL ORIGINALLY PASSED THE ORDER IN ITA NO.933/ MDS/2015, DATED 06.05.2016, DISMISSING THE ASSESSEES APPEAL. 2. LATTER THE ASSESSEE FILED AN MP IN 272/MDS/2016 WHI CH WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 18.11.20 16 FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. NOW THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS MISCELLAN EOUS PETITION SEEKING THE RECALL OF EARLIER ORDER IN M.P. NO.272/2016 AS UNDER:- 1. THE PETITIONER HEREBY SUBMITS AND PRAYS THAT HE HA S A SINCERE DESIRE TO PROSECUTE HIS APPEAL AND THAT THE RE WERE CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND HIS CONTROL WHICH HAS RESULTED IN NON APPEARANCE. 2. THE PETITIONER HEREBY ASSURES THAT HE WILL FULL CO- OPERATE AND ASSIST THE HONOURABLE BENCH IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL MOST JUDICIOUSLY AND WILL DISCHARGE HIS RELA TED OBLIGATIONS PROPERLY. 3. THE PETITIONER HEREBY PRAYS THAT YOUR HONOUR BE KIN D ENOUGH TO RESTORE/RECALL THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEAL FOR A FRESH HEARING. 2.1 IN OUR OPINION, SEC. 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX A CT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) COULD BE INVOKED ONLY IN A SITUATION I F THERE IS A MISTAKE IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL U/S. 254(1) OF THE ACT . THE IMPUGNED MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGA INST THE ORDER PASSED U/S. 254(2) OF THE ACT IN M.P.NO.272/MDS/2016, DATE D 18.11.2016 AS REFERRED IN COLUMN NO.6 OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETI TION. THEREFORE PRINCIPALLY, THE PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE H AS TO BE REJECTED ON THIS 3 M.P. NO.111/MDS/2017 GROUND ALONE. THE RELIEF WHICH IS BEING SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF IMPUGNED PETITION IS NOT TENABLE ON THE REASON T HAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NO POWER TO ADJUDICATE UPON SUBSEQUENT PETITION FIL ED U/S. 254(2) OF THE ACT. THERE MAY BE THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT EA RLIER ORDER AGAINST WHICH THE IMPUGNED RECTIFICATION APPLICATION IS F ILED IS ALSO AN ORDER PASSED ON SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION, THEN THE REMEDY C ANNOT BE LYING WITH THE TRIBUNAL BUT ELSEWHERE. FOR THIS PROPORTION, W E PLACE RELIANCE ON THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN TH E CASE OF DR. PANNEERSELVAM VS. AICT 319 ITR 135 . ACCORDINGLY, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH OF JUNE, 201 7, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) () /JUDICIAL MEMBER (CHANDRA POOJARI) % () /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, *( /DATED: THE 7TH JUNE, 2017. KV COPY TO: PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR