THE DCIT CIRCLE 2(1), Ujjain V. M/S SHYAM GRUH NIRMAN SANSTHA, Ujjain

MA 12/Ind/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7745 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

SHYAM GRUH NIRMAN MA NO.12 OF 2019 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO.12/IND/2019 (ARISING OUT OF MA NO.3/IND/2018 AND ITA NO.35/IND/ 2015) A.Y. 2004-05 ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), UJJAIN :: APPLICANT VS SHYAM GRUH NIRMAN SANSTHA, UJJAIN PAN AACAS 3269 C :: RESPONDENT FOR REVENUE SHRI R.S. AMBEDKER, SR. DR FOR ASSESSEE S MT. SONAM KHANDELWAL, CA DATE OF HEARING 07 . 6 .201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24 . 7 .2019 PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM THIS MA HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 07.6.2018/08.2.2016. 2. LD. SR. DR SUBMITTED THAT VIDE ORDER DATED 08.2. 2016, THE TRIBUNAL DECIDED THE MAIN APPEAL I.E. ITA NO.35/IND/2015. HO WEVER, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN MA NO.3/IND/2018 REQUESTING THEREIN TH AT WHILE DECIDING THE MAIN APPEAL, THE TRIBUNAL DID NOT DECIDE THE GROUND NOS.3 & 4. BUT, THE TRIBUNAL HAS INADVERTENTLY, VIDE ORDER DATED 07.6.2 018, RECALLED WHOLE THE APPEAL WHICH WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRAY FOR THE SAME. THEREFORE, LD. SR. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE MODIFICATI ON TO THIS EFFECT MAY BE SHYAM GRUH NIRMAN MA NO.12 OF 2019 2 MADE ACCORDINGLY. ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE AGREED TO THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE LD. SR. DR. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE FILE. HAVING GONE THROUGH THE RECORDS, WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 08.2.201 6 (SUPRA) DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERIT. FURTHER, WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL DECIDED GROUND NO.4. WHICH WAS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONTENDING THAT GROUND NO.4 WAS NOT DECIDED. HOWEVER, THE TRIBUNAL INADVERTENTLY LEFT TO DECIDE GROUND NO.3 OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING CONFIRMATION OF AD DITION OF RS.1,29,085/- ON ACCOUNT OF THE INTEREST PAYMENT. THEREFORE, WE M ODIFY OUR EARLIER ORDER DATED 07.6.2018 PASSED IN MA NO.03/IND/2018 AND DIR ECT THE REGISTRY TO REFIX THE MAIN APPEAL I.E. ITA NO. 35/IND/2015 ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DECIDING GROUND NO.3 OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THIS MA IS ALLOWED TO THE LIMITED EXTENT AS DIRECTED HEREINABOVE. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24.7.2019 . SD/ - ( MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED :24 . 7.2019 !VYAS! COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/PR.CIT(A)/PR.CIT/DR, INDORE