Shikshan Sevak Co Op Society Ltd., Sangli V. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax -1, Pune

MA 129/PUN/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2198 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2023
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DEEPA SANJAY HIRAY

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE [THROUGH HYBRID HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.No.129/PUN./2023 Arising out of I.T.A.No.834/PUN./2022 - Assessment Year 2017-2018 Shikshan Sevak Co.op Society Ltd., Tanaji Chowk, SANGLI – 416 416. Maharashtra. PAN AAAAS1169H vs. The PCIT-1, Pune. (Applicant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sarang Gudhate For Revenue : Smt. Deepa Sanjay Hiray Date of Hearing : 03.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 27.05.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s miscellaneous application M.A.No.129/PUN./2023 filed for assessment year 2017-2018 seeks to recall/rectify the tribunal’s order dated 24.04.2023 in dismissing it’s main appeal I.T.A.No.834/PUN./2022, thereby not condoning delay of 190 days in filing the appeal, u/sec.254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. A perusal of the case file reveals that the tribunal’s impugned order had dismissed the assessee’s main appeal ITA.No.834/PUN./2022 for the sole reason that it had not filed 2 M.A.No.129/PUN./2023 any condonation petition despite availing numerous opportunities. Learned counsel representing the assessee is indeed very fair during the course of hearing to this effect. That being the case, we hardly see any merit in the assessee’s instant miscellaneous application M.A.No.129/PUN./2023 as once it had not filed any condonation petition, our impugned order should not be held as suffering from an apparent mistake on record in light of hon’ble apex court in the case of ACIT vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd., [2008] 305 ITR 227 (SC); CIT vs. Reliance Telecom Ltd., [2021] 133 taxmann.com 41 (SC); to invoke sec.254(2) rectification jurisdiction. Rejected accordingly. 3. This assessee’s miscellaneous application M.A.No.129/PUN./2023 is dismissed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27.05.2024. Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 27 th May, 2024 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The PCIT, Pune-1, Pune 4. D.R. ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.