Max Value Housing, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

MA 115/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5485 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO. 1 15 /MDS/2017 [IN I.T.A.NO. 1 9 8 9 /MDS/201 4 ] ASSESSMENT YEAR :20 0 8 - 09 M/S. MAX VALUE HOUSING, FLAT F5, SIR USMAN COURT, 63/27, ELDAMS ROAD, ALWARPET, CHENNAI 600 018. [PAN: AANFM2165P] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX, CIRCLE XV , CHENNAI 600 034. ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN , J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 0 1 . 0 9 .201 7 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMEN T : 21 . 0 9 .201 7 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : BY MEANS OF PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, THE ASSESSEE SEEKS TO RECALL THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I.T.A. NO. 1 989 /MDS/201 4 DATED 2 9 .0 1 .201 6 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 0 8 - 09 BY STATING THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, IN VIEW OF THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CBDT VIDE ITS CIRCULAR DATED 10.12.2015 AS THE TAX EFFECT IN ITS APPEAL IS BELOW THE MONETARY L IMIT OF .10 LAKHS. IN THE PETITION, BY QUANTIFYING THE TAX EFFECT, IT WAS THE SUBMISSION OF M.P. NO . 1 15 /M/ 1 7 2 THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ACTUAL TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS .3,54,294/ - AND THUS, ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29.01.2016 MAY BE RECALLED TO RECTIFY THE MISTAK E APPARENT ON RECORD . 2 . DESPITE HAVING NOTED THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING BY MAKING ENDORSEMENT IN THE ORDER SHEET BY THE LD. COUNSEL, WHEN THE MP WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 01.09.2017, THERE WAS NO REPRESENTATION FROM ASSESSEE S SIDE. HENCE WE PROCEEDED TO DECIDE THE MP AFTER HEARING TO THE LD. DR AND BY CONSIDERING THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3 . THE LD. DR DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECT TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4 . WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR, PERUSED THE PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, THE BENCH HAS CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH PARTIES AT LENGTH WITH REGARD TO THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL AND MOREOVER, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE BENCH THE FACT OF LESS TAX EFFECT FOR CONSIDERATION. THUS, THE TRIBUNAL, AFTER CONSIDERING THE DETAILED PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY BOTH PARTIES, A DJUDICATED THE ISSUE IN ITS ORDER. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE IS A MISTAKE ON THE FACE OF THE ORDER, AS M.P. NO . 1 15 /M/ 1 7 3 THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS LESS THAN TH E MONETARY LIMIT FIXED BY THE CBDT, WHICH SHOULD BE RECTIFIED BY RECALLING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29.01.2016. ACCORDINGLY, WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO POST THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON REGULAR COURSE. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE M.P. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 21 ST SEPTEMBER , 201 7 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 21 . 0 9 .201 7 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.