Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1266 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
2 year(s) 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date
02-07-2024
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
B
Next Hearing Date
30-05-2024
Assessment Year
2015-2016
Appeal Filed On
23-05-2022
Judgement Text
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “बी” , चǷीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH : HYBRID MODE ŵी आकाश दीप जैन, उपाȯƗ एवं ŵी िवŢम िसंह यादव, लेखा सद˟ BEFORE: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN, VP & SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM Miscellaneous Application No. 13/Chd/2022 In आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO. 1112/Chd/2019 िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The ITO Ward 5(5), Chandigarh बनाम Smt. Rachna Arora, H.No. 1846, Sector 34-D Chandigarh ˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ALJPA7492G अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ/Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 07/06/2024 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03/07/2024 आदेश/Order PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. : The present Misc. Application has been filed by the Revenue arising out of order of the Coordinate Bench in ITA No. 1112/Chd/2019 dt. 31/03/2021. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that there is a delay in filing the present Misc. Application by 235 days. In this regard, the Ld. DR has drawn our reference to the condonation application filed by the Revenue and it was submitted that the delay in filing the Misc. Application has happened on account of Covid pandemic and is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the period of limitation has been extended on account of COVID-19 pandemic and it was submitted that where the COVID period is excluded, the application so filed by the Revenue is within the stipulated limitation period. The Ld. AR is heard, who has not raised any objection to the explanation so 2 submitted by the Ld. DR. In view of the submissions made by both the parties, the Misc. Application is admitted for necessary adjudication. 3. It was submitted by the ld DR that the Tribunal vide its order dt. 31/03/2021 has dismissed the appeal of the Revenue and upheld the order of the Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of CIT, Faridabad Vs. Shri Dinesh Verma in ITA No. 381/2014. It was submitted that there is a subsequent decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Kamal Kant Kamboj Vs. ITO [2017] 397 ITR 240 which has not been considered by the Tribunal while deciding the claim of deduction of the assessee under section 54 of the Act. It was accordingly submitted that there is a mistake which is apparent from the record in terms of not following the subsequent jurisdictional High Court decision in case of Kamal Kant Kamboj (supra) and therefore the order so passed by the Bench may be recalled and appeal be heard afresh on merits in light of the later decision. 4. In his submission, the Ld. AR submitted that firstly, the Tribunal has considered the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in case of Dinesh Kumar Verma (supra) and being the binding decision of the jurisdictional High Court, order so passed by the Tribunal cannot be held to be erroneous. It was further submitted that even though the subsequent decision in case of Kamal Kant Kamboj was not brought to the notice of the Bench which has resulted in the same not been considered by the Bench, at the same time, it was submitted that the facts and circumstances of the present case are concerned, the same clearly aligned with the case of Dinesh Kumar Verma (supra) and are clearly distinguishable as far as the subsequent decision in case of Kamal Kant Kamboj(supra). It was further submitted that there is latest decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Pr. CIT Vs. Jangpal Singh Tanwar in ITA No. 293 of 2022 (O&M) dated 09/08/2023 wherein the decision of the Coordinate Bench in ITA No. 40/Chd/2021 dated 22/06/2022 has been affirmed by Hon’ble 3 jurisdictional High Court wherein the decision of Kamal Kant Kamboj has been duly considered by the Tribunal and thereafter the same has been confirmed by the Hon’ble High Court. It was accordingly submitted that there is no mistake which is apparent from the record as far as non following the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court as each case will turn on its own merits and as far as the facts of the present case are concerned, the same are clearly pari- materia as far as decision in case of Dinesh Kumar Verma (supra) which has been duly followed by the Tribunal while deciding the matter. It was accordingly submitted that there is no mistake which is apparent from the record and the application so filed by the Revenue deserves to be dismissed. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and purused the material available on record. No doubt, the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional Punjab and Haryana High Court is binding on this Tribunal and where there are more than one decision, the latter decision of equal and higher strength of the Bench will take the precedence and non-following of the same will lead to a mistake apparent from record. At the same time, as righty submitted by the ld AR, the legal proposition so laid down by the Hon’ble High Court has to be seen in the context of material facts which has been brought to the notice and considered by the Hon’ble High Court and with a slight variation in the facts of a particular case, the final outcome of the decision can vary and consequent ratio decidendi of the said decision. 6. In the instant case, all three decisions are of Division Bench of equal strength of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Coordinate Bench while deciding the matter has considered and analysed the matter in light of the decision of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Dinesh Kumar Verma (supra) and as far as the subsequent decision of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Kamal Kant Kamboj is concerned, we agree with the contention of the ld AR that the facts are clearly 4 distinguishable and the facts of the present case continue to be aligned with the case of Dinesh Kumar Verma (supra) and that there is a latest decision of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Jangpal Singh Tanwar (supra) wherein earlier two decisions have been considered and matter has been decided in favour of the assessee. In view of the same, we find that there is no mistake which has crept in the order so passed by the Coordinate Bench and the misc. application so filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed. 7. In the result, the misc. application is hereby dismissed. (Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/07/2024 ) Sd/- Sd/- आकाश दीप जैन िवŢम िसंह यादव (AAKASH DEEP JAIN) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) उपाȯƗ / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AG आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant / 2. ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुƅ/ CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, चǷीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar
