Shri Satya Pal Saini, Ex-MLA, Pathankot V. The Dy.Commissioner of Income-tax, Pathankot

MA 121/ASR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1369 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 20-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO.121(ASR)/2013 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.63(ASR)/2013) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2007-08 PAN : SHRI SATYA PAL SAINI, EX-MLA VS. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATHANKOT. CIRCLE-3, PATHANKOT. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY:SH.P.N.ARORA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY:SH.MAHAVIR SINGH, DR DATE OF HEARING: 17/01/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:30/01/2014 ORDER PER BENCH ; THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE ARIS ES FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 19.08.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.6 3(ASR)/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE MISC. APPLICATION FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: FROM THE ORDER YOUR HONOUR WILL FIND THAT THERE AR E MISTAKES APPARENT FROM RECORD. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING TWO GROUN DS WERE RAISED WHICH ARE APPEARING ON PAGE NO.20 OF THE ORDER OF T HE ITAT, AMRITSAR MA NO.121(ASR)/2013 2 BENCH, AMRITSAR. THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE 4 & 5, WHICH ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 4. THAT THE AO HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN DISALLOWING D EDUCTION OF RS.45 LACS PAID EXTRA TO SHRI VIJAY UMMAT FOR RESCI NDING THE SALE AGREEMENT TO WHOM ASSESSEE SOLD ONE HALF OF HI S PLOT, ON THE BASIS OF UNCORROBORATED STATEMENT WITHOUT CONFRONTING THE ASSESSEE. SIMILARLY, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE SAME. 5. THAT THE AO HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN NO APPRECIATING T HE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAD SOLD ONE HALF SHARE OF HIS SHARE TO SH.MOHIT KUMAR GARG AND HARJINDER SINGH AND THE ADD ITION OF ONE HALF OF THE ADDITION OF RS.1,61,18,658/- SHO ULD NOT HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE ONE HALF SHARE BELONGS TO SH.MOHIT KUMAR GARG AND SH. HARJIN DER SINGH AND IF AT ALL, THE ADDITION SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE IN THEIR HANDS. THE DEVELOPERS TATA HOUSING HAD ALSO P AID THE ADVANCE/EARNEST MONEY TO SH. MOHIT GARG AND SH.HARJ INDER SINGH DIRECTLY. FROM THE PLAIN READING OF THE ORDER YOUR HONOUR WIL L FIND THAT TWO GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BEFORE YOUR HONOUR HAV E NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AND ADJUDICATED. IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYE D THAT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL NOS. 4 & 5 RAISED BEFORE YOUR HON OUR AS REFERRED TO ABOVE MAY KINDLY BE CONSIDERED AND ADJ UDICATED. AS THESE TWO GROUNDS OF APPEALS WERE SPECIFICALLY RAISED & ARGUED BEFORE YOUR HONOUR, BUT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN C ONSIDERED, IN VIEW OF THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS PRAYED THAT T HESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE CONSIDERED AND DECIDED AND THE ORDER PASSED MAY KINDLY BE RECALLED. IN VIEW OF THESE CIR CUMSTANCES, THIS MISC. APPLICATION MAY KINDLY BE ACCEPTED. NE CESSARY RECEIPT ON ACCOUNT OF MISC. APPLICATION FEE FOR RS. 50/- IS ENCLOSED. THIS MISC. APPLICATION IS WELL WITHIN THE TIME AS THE ORDER WAS PASSED ON 19/08/2013, BY THE ITAT, AMRITS AR BENCH, AMRITSAR IN ITA NO.63(ASR)/2013. MA NO.121(ASR)/2013 3 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, MR. P.N. ARORA ARGUED THAT GROUNDS NO. 4 & 5 OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE NOT BEEN DECIDED IN THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF VARIOUS ASSESSES PASSED ON 19.08.2013.THE LD. COUNS EL, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD, AND A CCORDINGLY, THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL NEEDS TO BE RECALLED FOR DECISION O F GROUNDS NO.4 & 5. 3. THE LD. DR, MR. MAHAVIR SINGH, ON THE OTHER HAND , RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ITAT, AMRITSAR BENCH, DATED 19.08.2013 . 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. GROUNDS NO. 4 & 5, AS POINTED OUT, HAS NOT BEEN DEC IDED BY US AND THEREFORE, TO THAT EXTENT THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM REC ORD AND ACCORDINGLY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.63(ASR)/2013 DATED 19.08.2013 IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE FOR DECIDING GROUNDS NO. 4 & 5 ONLY I S RECALLED. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE MAIN APPEAL IN ITA NO.63(ASR)/2 013 IN A ROUTINE MANNER. 5. IN THE RESULT, M.A.NO.121(ASR)/2013 FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.01.2014. SD- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (B.P.JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: JANUARY, 2014 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:SH. SATYA PAL SAINI, EX-MLA, PATHANKOT . 2. THE DCIT, CIR.3, PATHANKOT 3. THE CIT(A), ASR 4. THE CIT, ASR. 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. MA NO.121(ASR)/2013 4 TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR