BRISTLECONE INDIA LIMITED, V. ACIT CIR 2(1),

MA 123/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3784 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MOHAMMED RIZWAN
• Assessee Lawyers: H P MAHAJANI

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 123/MUM/2015 (ARISING OUT OF I .T.A. NO . 6511/MUM/2013) ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 M/S. BRISTLECONE INDIA LTD., 2 ND FLOOR, TECHNIPLEX COMPLEX - 1, OFF. VEER SAVARKAR FLYOVER, GOREGAON (W), MUMBAI - 400 062 / VS. THE ACIT, CIR 2(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 400 020 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAACM 5186E ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: SHRI H.P. MAHAJANI / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MOHAMMED RIZWAN / DATE OF HEARING : 0 4 . 1 2 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 0 4 .12 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: WITH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE SEEKS FOR THE RECTIFICATION OF THE ERRORS APPARENT FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NOS. 6511/M/2013. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US TOOK US TO THE VARIOUS CLAUSES OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AND POINTED OUT THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL FACTS RELATING TO THE DATES OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER S FOR A.Y RS 2006 - 07 M.A. NO. 123/M/2015 2 AND 2007 - 08 WHILE CONSIDERING THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION I.E. A.Y. 2008 - 09. IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND T HE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 WERE RECEIVED SUBSEQUENT TO THE DATE OF FILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION , THEREFORE , ANY REFERENCE TO THE EARLIER YEARS ORDER IS ERRONEOUS AN D THEREFORE THERE IS A MISTAKE WHICH NEED TO BE RECTIFIED. 3. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL. WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE CLAIM OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS VERY CLEARLY MENTIONED IN ITS OR DER AT PARA - 9.1 ON PAGE - 6 THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS VERY MUCH AWARE OF THE STAND TAKEN BY THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OF EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS WHICH FACT EVEN AT THIS STAGE THE LD. COUNSEL COULD NOT DEN Y . THERE IS NO REFERENCE TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OR THE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL WHILE ANALYZING THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS A PPLICATION AND THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISS ED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 4 TH DECEMBER , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( JOGINDER SINGH ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 4 TH DECEMBER , 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS M.A. NO. 123/M/2015 3 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI