APTECH LTD, V. DCIT 8(1),

MA 128/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2379 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N PADMANABAN A BC
• Assessee Lawyers: S C TIWARI
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Time period of passing order

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL H BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) AND VIVEK VARMA, (JM) . . , , MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.128 & 129/MUM/2014 (ARISING OUT OF MA NO.462 & 463/MUM/2011 AND 34 ./I.T.A. NO.7114 & 7316/MUM/2007) ( 56 7 / ASSESSMENT YEAR:2004-05) M/S APTECH LTD., 54-A, ELITE AUTO HOUSE, SIR M VASANJI ROAD, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI-400093 / VS. DY .COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 8(1), R NO.210/262, 2 ND FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M K ROAD, MUMBAI-400020 ( 34 89 / APPELLANT) .. ( :;89 / RESPONDENT) 8 ./ <= ./ PAN/GIRNO.:AADCA0602L 34 89 > / APPLICANT BY : S HRI S C TIWARI :;89 ? > /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N PADMANABAN @ A ? BC / DATE OF HEARING : 19.9.2014 DE76 ? BC /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.9.2014 / O R D E R PER B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THESE MISC. APPLICATIONS SE EKING RECTIFICATION OF COMMON ORDER DATED 25.1.2010 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL , WHICH WAS SUBSEQUENTLY RECTIFIED BY AN ORDER DATED 13.1.2012 PASSED AGAINS T MISC. APPLICATIONS NO.462 AND 463/MUM/2011 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. WE HEARD THE PARTIES AND ALSO PERUSED THE RECORD . BOTH THE MISC. APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 16. 4.2014. AS STATED EARLIER THE TRIBUNAL HAS PASSED COMMON ORDER IN I.T.A. NOS.7114 & 7316/MUM/2007 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON 25.1.201 0. HENCE, THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER THE EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS MA NO.128 & 129/MUM/2014 2 FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND THE SAME IS BEYOND THE LIMITATION PERIOD PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOM E TAX ACT. 1961(THE ACT). 3. THE LD. COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMI TTED THAT THE TIME LIMIT OF FOUR YEARS SHOULD BE COMPUTED FROM THE DATE OF O RDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE MISC. APPLICATION NOS.462 AND 463 /MUM/ 2011 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE ARE UNABLE TO AGREE WITH HIM, SINCE THE ORDER PA SSED AGAINST THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ONLY RECTIFY THE ORIGINA L ORDER DATED 25.1.2010 AND HENCE, IN OUR VIEW, THE TIME LIMIT OF FOUR YEARS H AS TO BE COMPUTED FROM THE DATE OF ORIGINAL ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST TH E APPEALS FILED BY THE PARTIES. SINCE THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN FILE D AFTER EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS FROM THE DATE OF TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 25.1.2010 THE Y ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS BOTH THE MISC. APPLICATION AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE MISC. APPLICATIONS F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. THE ABOVE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19TH SEP, 2014. DE76 @ F G H 19TH SEP, 2014 E ? IA J SD SD ( / VIVEK VARMA) ( . . / B.R. BASKARAN) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER @ A MUMBAI: 19TH SEP,2014. . . ./ SRL , SR. PS !'#$% &%'# / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. 34 89 / THE APPELLANT 2. :;89 / THE RESPONDENT. 3. @ LB ( 34 ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED 4. @ LB / CIT CONCERNED 5. 6. MI :B N5 , 34 C 3N56 , @ A / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED IO PA / GUARD FILE. Q @ / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY R 4< (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) 34 C 3N56 , @ A /ITAT, MUMBAI