Smt. Manju Rohilla, Nalagarh V. Addl. CIT, Solan

MA 120/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2483 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO. 120/CHD/2014 IN ITA NO. 1098/CHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 SMT. MANJU ROHILA, V THE ADDL. CIT, W/O SHRI VARINDER SINGH ROHILLA, SOLAN RANGE, H.NO. 13, PHASE-1, SOLAN. NEW NALAGARH (HP). PAN: ADXPR5607G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SURINDER BAB BAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL DATE OF HEARING : 21.11.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.11.2014 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM WE HAVE HEARD LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTI ES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR RECALLING OF THE EARLIER ORDER OF T HE TRIBUNAL DATED 31.10.2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. THE TRIBUNAL WHILE PASSING THE ORDER ON 31.10.2011 CONSIDERED TH E IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.10.2008 FOR THE ABOVE ASSESSMENT YEA R AND RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) WITH DIRECTION TO PASS SPEAKING ORDER. APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 2 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THAT IN-FACT APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE AS SESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEA LS) SHIMLA DATED 22.09.2009 CHALLENGING THE LEVY OF PENALTY UN DER SECTION 271D OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THEREFORE, BY MISTAKE THE WRONG ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED CONSIDERING IT TO BE A QUANTU M APPEAL. IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT PENALTY APPEAL UNDER SEC TION 271D MAY BE DECIDED BY RECALLING THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 4. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND SUBMISSI ONS OF THE PARTIES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE EARLIER ORDER HAS TO BE RECALLED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE CLEARLY SHOWS THAT ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271D OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, TH E ASSESSEE, BY MISTAKE FILED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ON QUANTUM DATED 06.10.2008 AFTER THE GROUND OF APPEAL, THEREF ORE, THE TRIBUNAL ASSUMING IT TO BE IMPUGNED ORDER, PASSED T HE ORDER ON 31.10.2011 RESTORING THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(APPEALS). IN-FACT, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE CONFIRMATI ON OF THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271D BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND FILED APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), SHIMLA D ATED 22.09.2009 WHICH IS YET TO BE DECIDED BY THE TRIBUN AL. THERE APPEARS A MISTAKE ON THE RECORD OF THE TRIBUNAL WHI CH IS TO BE RECTIFIED. 5. WE, ACCORDINGLY, RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L DATED 31.10.2011 AND RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE T O ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THE APPEAL FO R HEARING ON MERITS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), S HIMLA DATED 22.09.2009. OFFICE IS FURTHER DIRECTED TO RE-ARRAN GE ALL THE 3 PAPERS IN THE APPEAL FOLDER TO AVOID FURTHER COMPLI CATION IN THE MATTER. OFFICE IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEAL FOR H EARING ON 09.02.2015 FOR HEARING ON MERITS WITH NOTICE TO BOT H THE PARTIES. 6. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21ST NOVEMBER,2014. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 21 ST NOVEMBER,2014. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH