REALSTONE EXPORTS LTD, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(3)(3), MUMBAI

MA 127/MUM/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2772 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-06-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY SETHI
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUM BAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM M.A. NO. 127/MUM/2020 (ARISING OUT OF MA NO. 207/MUM/2018) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) REALSTONE EXPORTS LTD. 204, MARINE CHAMBERS, SIR V.T.ROAD, NEW MARINE LINES MUMBAI-400 020 VS. ITO, WARD-8(3)(3) MUMBAI PAN/GIR NO. AACCR8504K ( APPELLANT ) : ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANJAY SETHI DATE OF HEARING : 18.06.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.06.2021 PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A. M.: BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSE SSEE SEEKS RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD IN ORDER MA NO. 20 7/MUM/2018, DATED 17/09/2018 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.3444/MUM/2014. 2. IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE H AS CONTENDED THAT THE EARLIER MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS DISMISSED BY EX-PARTE ORDER, AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED THE NOTICE AS THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THE AD DRESS OF THE ASSESSEE. WE NOTE THAT IN THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION SEVERAL NOTIC ES HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LAST NOTICE IS ADDRESSED IS THE CORRECT ADDRESS AS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSE. STILL NONE HAD APPEARED. HENCE, WE DISPOSE OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS A PPLICATION BY GOING THROUGH THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS AND HEARING THE LD. DR. 2 MA NO.127/M/20 3. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, WE NOTE THAT THIS IS A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD, IN A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT. IN THIS REGARD, IT MAY BE NOTED THAT SECTION 254(2) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961 PERMITTING THE RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE IS ONL Y WITH REGARD TO THE AMENDMENT OF ANY ORDER PASSED U/S 254(1). HENCE, THE MISCELLANEOUS A PPLICATION ORDER PASSED U/S 254(2) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961 CANNOT BE SUBJECTED TO AN APPEAL U/S 254(2). IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLI CATION AGAINST A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ORDER IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. IN THIS VIE W OF THE MATTER, THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY T HE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 .06.2021 SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 23.06.2021 THIRUMALESH , SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT - CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER, (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI