A` VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL ; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, AM M.A. NO. 119/JP/2017 (ARISING OUT IF ITA NO. 132/JP/2013 & C.O. NO. 14/J P/2013) FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10. THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 6, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD., SETU BHAWAN, JHALANA DOONGARI, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AABCR 9650 F VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA (ADDL. CIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL (C.A) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 06.10.2017. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11/10/2017. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM. THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE REVENUE ARISE OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 132/JP/2013 & C.O. NO. 14/JP/20 13 DATED 03.03.2017 SEEKING DECISION ON THE ISSUE RELATED TO DISALLOWANCE OF CO NTRIBUTION TO STATE RENEWAL FUND AND DISALLOWANCE OUT OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES. 2. THE LD. D/R REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS AS MADE I N THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. 2.1. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE OPPOSED THE SUBMISSIONS AND SUBMITTED THAT THE PRESENT APPLICATION IS GROSS MISUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW AND TOTALLY MISPLACED. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 132/JP/203 IN THE ORDER DATED 03.03.2017, SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED BY THE REV ENUE, HAD GIVEN EFFECT OF THE ORDER OF THE THIRD MEMBER. HE SUBMITTED THAT BEFOR E THE THIRD MEMBER, THE ISSUE 2 MA NO. 119/JP/2017 RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEV. & CONSTRUCTION CORPN. LTD . WAS RELATED TO DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IA SINCE T HERE WAS A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION BETWEEN THE LD. MEMBERS IN RESPECT OF THE ALLOWABIL ITY OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IA. HOWEVER, THE OTHER ISSUES WERE ALREADY DECID ED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. UNDER THESE FACTS, THE PRESENT MISCE LLANEOUS APPLICATION DESERVES DISMISSAL. 2.2 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS. WE FIND T HAT THE OTHER ISSUES WERE NOT REFERRED FOR THE DECISION OF THE THIRD MEMBER AS TH E LEARNED MEMBERS WERE ALREADY CONSENSUS ON THE DISMISSAL OF THE GROUNDS ON THE IS SUE WHICH THE REVENUE IS NOW URGING TO BE DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL. THIS FACT IS NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE REVENUE. THEREFORE, WE DISMISS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION . 2.3. WE ARE NOT IMPOSING COST. THE AO SHOULD REMAIN VIGILANT BEFORE FILING SUCH APPLICATION IN FUTURE. 3. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11/10/2017. SD/- SD/- HKKXPUN ( DQY HKKJR ) ( BHAGCHAND ) ( KUL BHARAT ) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 11/10/2017. DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR. 2. THE RESPONDENT- M/S. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEVELO PMENT & CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD., JAIPUR. 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE ( M.A. 119/JP/2017) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 3 MA NO. 119/JP/2017 RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEV. & CONSTRUCTION CORPN. LTD .