IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM] M.A. NO. 113/KOL/2017 (A/O I.T.A NO. 864/KOL/2016) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA VS.- F. HARLEY & CO. PVT. LTD. [PAN : AAACF 3966 D] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI R. CHOWDHURY, ADDL. CIT FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI M. D. SHAH, LD. AR DATE OF HEARING : 28.09.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.10.2018 ORDER PER M.BALAGANESH, AM BY VIRTUE OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE RE VENUE SEEKS TO RECALL THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A. NO. 864/KOL /2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011- 12 DATED 08.03.2017 ON THE GROUND THAT THE ISSUE OF PROVISIONS OF PURCHASE WAS EXAMINED BY THE THEN LD. AO, WHICH IN THE OPINION O F THE REVENUE IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED A LE TTER DATED 07.03.2014 BEFORE THE LD. AO DURING THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS EXPLAINING THE DETAILS OF PROVISION FOR PURCHASES. THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT WA S COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 18.03.2014 AFTER DUE EXAMINATION OF THE SAME. HENCE THE ACTION OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, IN INVOKING REVISIONARY JURISDICTION U/S 263 OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAID ISSUE OF PROVISION FOR PURCHASES WAS NOT EXAMINED BY THE LD. AO IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT, WAS QUASHED BY T HIS TRIBUNAL AND APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE 263 ORDER OF LD. CIT WAS ALLOW ED. THE REVENUE BEFORE US IN MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION PROCEEDINGS PLEADS THAT N O DETAILS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. AO. BUT WE FIND THAT THE AS SESSEE HAD FILED A DETAILED WRITTEN 2 MA NO. 113/KOL/2017 (A/O I.T.A NO. 864/KOL/2016) F. HARLEY & CO. PVT. LTD. A.YR.2011-12 2 SUBMISSION DATED 07.03.2014 BEFORE THE LD. AO WHICH IS PART OF THE PAPER BOOK VIDE PAGES 1 TO 6 FILED IN THE ORIGINAL APPELLATE PROCEE DINGS BEFORE US AND THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO RELIED ON VARIOUS CASE LAWS IN SUPPORT OF HIS SUBMISSIONS TOGETHER WITH THE EVIDENCES. THIS LETTER IS PART OF PAPER BOOK FILED BEFORE US BY THE ASSESSEE. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DULY CERTIFIED THE PAPER BOOK THAT THESE DETAILS WERE INDEED SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. AO. IF THE REVENUE HAD ANY GRIEVANCE ON THE BASIC FACT OF SUBMISSION OF DETAILS PER SE BEFORE THE LD. AO, THE N IT SHOULD HAVE OBJECTED BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT OR BY ANY OTHER LEGAL MEANS BEFORE US IN THE ORIGINAL APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS TO IGNORE THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE A SSESSEE. BUT THIS WAS ADMITTEDLY NOT DONE BY THE REVENUE IN THE ORIGINAL APPELLATE P ROCEEDINGS BEFORE US. THIS TRIBUNAL HAD ADJUDICATED THE ENTIRE ISSUE BASED ON THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS ALSO DULY CERTIFIED BY THE ASSES SEE TO HAVE BEEN FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. HENCE NO ERROR COULD BE ATTRIBU TED IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE REASONS ADDUCED BY THE REVENUE IN MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION DESERVES TO BE REJECTED. 2. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 12.10.2018 SD/- SD/- [S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI] [ M .BALAGANESH] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 12.10.2018 SB, SR. PS 3 MA NO. 113/KOL/2017 (A/O I.T.A NO. 864/KOL/2016) F. HARLEY & CO. PVT. LTD. A.YR.2011-12 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. F. HARLEY & CO. PVT. LTD., 5, RAMESHWAR SHAW ROA D, KOLKATA-700014. 2. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA 3.CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVA TE SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/ D.D.O., ITAT KOLKATA BENCHE S