NIRANJAN B. MAJANI, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 24(3)-2, MUMBAI

MA 13/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6963 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 09-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMAN KUMAR LD
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHWIN S CHHAG LD
• Keywords: Bogus purchase

Judgement Text

MA NO.13/MUM/2018 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.5025/MUM/2017 NIRANJAN B. MAJANI ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.13/MUM/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.5025/MUM/2017) ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) NIRANJAN B.MAJANI 1106, GULSHAN VILLA PREMISES CHSL C.D.BARFIWALA LANE JUHU CROSS LANE, JUHU GALI NEXT TO MAHAVIR JAIN VIDAYALAYA ANDHERI (W), MUMBAI- 400 058 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 24(3)(2) 515, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS LALBAUGH, PAREL MUMBAI-400 013 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO.AHWPM-1549-H ( /APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASHWIN S. CHHAG, LD. AR REVENUE BY : SHRI SUMAN KUMAR, LD. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 13/07/2018 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13/07/2018 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 PER MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) 1. BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE AS SESSEE SEEKS SETTING ASIDE OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER ITA NO.5025/MUM /2017 DATED 01/11/2017. MA NO. 13/MUM/2018 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.5025/MUM/2017 NIRANJAN B. MAJANI ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 2 2. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE [AR], SHRI ASHWIN S.CHHAG, BY WAY OF THIS PETITION, PLEADED THAT THE AFORESAID OR DER IS ERRONEOUS IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT CERTAIN JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS HA VE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AND NO REFERENCE TO THESE DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE ORDER. IT IS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE ESTIMATION HAS BEEN MADE MERELY ON DOUBTS WHICH IS AGAINST PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUS TICE. PER CONTRA, LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED WITH DU E APPLICATION OF MIND AND THE SAME COULD BE RECALLED ONLY IN CASE TH ERE WAS ANY MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. 3. WE HAVE CAREFULLY HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AN D PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD INCLUDING THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL. WE FIND THAT THE SCOPE OF RECTIFICATION, AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 254(2), IS IN A VERY NARROW COMPASS AND THE SAME CO ULD BE RESORTED ONLY IN CASE THERE WAS ANY MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD AND NOT OTHERWISE. IT IS WELL SETTLED LAW THAT STATUTORY AU THORITY CANNOT EXERCISE THE POWER OF REVIEW UNLESS SUCH POWER IS EXPRESSLY CONFERRED BY THE STATUTE OR OTHERWISE. WE FIND THAT THIS POWER IS MI SSING FOR THE TRIBUNAL. IN THE ABOVE BACKGROUND, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE-OFF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. 4. UPON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE FI ND THAT VIDE PARAS-5 & 6, THE IMPUGNED MATTER, ON LEGAL GROUNDS AS WELL AS ON MERITS WAS DULY BEEN CONSIDERED AND THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED WITH DUE APPLICATION OF MIND. THE ISSUE INVOLVED WAS ESTIMATION OF INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES WHICH WAS ALTOGETHER A FACTUAL ISSUE. WE ARE UNABLE TO FIND ANY MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE MA NO. 13/MUM/2018 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.5025/MUM/2017 NIRANJAN B. MAJANI ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 3 SAME. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION MERELY SEEKS RE VIEW OF THE ORDER, WHICH WE DECLINE TO ENTERTAIN. THE APPLICATION IS B EREFT OF ANY MERITS. 5. RESULTANTLY, THE APPLICATION STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH JULY, 2018. SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIRSINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 13/07/2018 SR.PS:-THIRUMALESH ! / 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