Bharat Ginning & Pressing Factory, V. The Income Tax Officer, Bharuch

MA 138/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3925 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 11-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DINESH SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: NIMESH VYAWALA

Judgement Text

, B IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER MISC. APPLICATION NO.138/AHD/2013 IN ./ ITA NO.2404/AHD/2007 / ASSTT.YEAR: 1999-2000] AND MISC. APPLICATION NOS.143 TO 146/AHD/2013 IN ITA NO.2405, 2406, 2407 AND 2408/AHD/2007 [ASSTT.YEARS : 2000-01, 2002-03, 2003-04 AND 2004-0 5 BHARAT GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY BEHIND RAILWAY STATION, PALEJ BHARUCH. PAN : AABFB 9254 G VS ITO, CENT.WARD - 1 BARODA. ( APPLICANT ) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NIMESH VYAWALA, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI DINESH SINGH, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 18/03/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29/03/2016 *+/ O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATIONS ARE DIRECTED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 12.4.2013 DISPOSED OF FIVE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSTT.YEARS 1999-2000 TO 20 04-05 RESPECTIVELY. ALL THESE APPEALS WERE FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF T HE CIT(A) DATED MA NO.138/AHD/2013 (5 MAS.) 2 17.1.2010. THERE WERE THREE ISSUES DISPUTED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE FIRST COMMON ISSUE WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNTS OF PAYMENTS MADE TO SEASONAL WORKERS. THE AO MADE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.3,23,788/- , 2,45,832/-, RS.12,000/-, RS.16,855/- AND RS.66,880/- IN THE ASS TT.YEARS 1999-2000 TO 2004-05 RESPECTIVELY. IN THE SECOND ISSUE, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153 C UPON THE ASSESSEE. IN THE ASSTT.YEAR 1999-2000, THERE WAS A N INDEPENDENT ISSUE, WHEREBY THE AO HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS.23,93 ,040/- WITH THE AID OF SECTION 45(4) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ON THE GROUN D THAT THERE WAS A DISSOLUTION OF THE FIRM WHICH RESULTED TRANSFER OF ASSETS, AND THEREFORE, CAPITAL GAIN WOULD BE ATTRACTED. ALL THESE THREE I SSUES HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND ADJUDICATED. THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS RUNNING INTO 15 PAGES. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED MA P OINTING OUT APPARENT ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THESE MAS. ARE RUNNING INTO 50 PAGES. APART FROM THESE MAS., THE ASSESSEE HAS FIL ED PAPER BOOK CONTAINING 27 DECISIONS RUNNING INTO 300 PAGES. 3. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD.REPRESENTATIVES, W E HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. THE POWER OF RECTIFI CATION CAN BE EXERCISED ONLY WHEN THE MISTAKE, WHICH IS SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED, IS AN OBVIOUS AND PATENT MISTAKE, WHICH IS APPARENT FROM THE RECORD AND NOT A MISTAKE, WHICH IS REQUIRED TO BE ESTABLISHED BY A RGUMENTS AND LONG DRAWN PROCESS OF REASONING ON POINTS, ON WHICH THER E MAY CONCEIVABLY BE TWO OPINIONS. THE COMPILATION OF 50 PAGES TO EXP LAIN THE MISTAKE IN AN ORDER WHICH IS JUST RUNNING INTO 15 PAGE, ITSELF SUGGESTS THAT THE MAS ARE TOTALLY VAGUE AND MISLEADING. FOR THIS VERY SI MPLE REASON, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO ENTERTAIN THESE MAS.UNDER SECTION 2 54(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, BECAUSE, THE PLEADING FAILED TO PIN POINT THE EXACT APPARENT ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE PLEADING, WE DISMISS THESE MAS., WITH A LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSEE TO FILE MA NO.138/AHD/2013 (5 MAS.) 3 FRESH APPLICATION, IF SO ADVISED, ON THESE ISSUES, WHICH SHOULD BE PRECISE AND BRIEF POINTING OUT APPARENT ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. IF THE ASSESSEE RESORTS TO FILING OF FRESH APPLICATIONS, T HEN, THAT APPLICATIONS SHOULD BE FILED WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED UN DER THE ACT. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, ALL THESE MAS. OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATIONS OF THE ASS ESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 29 TH MARCH, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER