IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, AM &Shri Aby T.Varkey, JM MA N o .75/Co ch/20 21: Asst. Y ear 2 0 0 9-201 0 ( Ar i sin g o ut o f IT A N o .26 8/Co ch/2 012) MA N o .111/Co ch/2 021: Ass t. Y ear 2 0 07-20 08 ( Ar i sin g o ut o f IT A N o .73 8/Co ch/2 01 3) The Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Kannur. v. Puzhathi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.,P.O.Kakkad Kannur – 670 307 [PAN: AAAAP 7672C] (Applicant) (Respondent) Applicant by: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR Respondent by: Sri.T.M.Sreedharan, Advocate Date of Hearing : 19.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 16.06.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is a set of two miscellaneous petitions by the Revenue directed against the order/s under section 254(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) in respect of the assessee’s assessments for assessment years (AYs) 2007-2008 & 2009-2010 vide orders dated 23.6.2016 & 15.3.2017 respectively. 2.1 The instant applications, presented on 30.9.2019, were explained by Smt. Devi, the ld. Sr. DR, to be in time when reckoned w.r.t. the date of the judgment by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Pr. CIT v. Poonjar Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. (ITA No.97/2016, dated 19.3.2019), reported at [2019] 414 ITR 67 (Ker)(FB). The same is, in our view, out of time inasmuch as it is to be moved within the period of six monthsfrom the end of the month in which the order sought to be amended stands passed [s.254(1)], i.e., 31/12/2016 and 30.9.2017 in the instant case. The said decision by the Hon'ble Court may have provided the reason/s or the cause for action MA Nos.75 & 111/Coch/2021 (AY 2007-08 & 2009-10) ITO v. Puzhathi Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. [ [ 2 to the Revenue, which has nevertheless to be preferred within the time provided by the statute. Further still, the Tribunal has no power to condone the said delay. 2.2 Without prejudice, the said decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court stands since reversed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Ors. v. CIT [2021] 431 ITR 1 (SC), which is being regularly followed by the Tribunal, as in Ariyallur Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. ITO (ITA Nos.882 & 883/Coch/2022, dated 17.4.2023). 3. In view of the foregoing, we find no merit in the instant MAs; being, rather, not maintainable in law. 4. In the result, the Revenue’s instant miscellaneous applications are dismissed. Order pronounced on June 16, 2023 under Rule 34 of The Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 Sd/- (Aby T.Varkey) Sd/- (Sanjay Arora) Judicial Member Accountant Member Cochin; Dated: June 16, 2023 Devadas G* Copy to: 1. The Applicant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(Appeals), Kozhikode 4. The Pr. CIT, Kozhikode. 5. The Sr. DR, ITAT, Cochin. 6. Guard File. Asst.Registrar ITAT, Cochin