The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Hoshiarpur V. Hoshiarpur Central Coop. Bank Ltd., Hoshiarpur

MA 14/ASR/2020

AI Insights

The case involves the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Hoshiarpur Circle, as the appellant, and M/s The Hoshiarpur Central Coop. Bank Ltd. as the respondent. The Revenue filed a Miscellaneous Application (MA No. 14/Asr/2020) against the order of the ITAT dated 20.12.2019, which pertained to the assessment year 2009-10. The application sought corrections to the Tribunal's earlier order concerning the disallowance of a standard loan and the handling of certain additions. The Tribunal acknowledged the mistakes pointed out by the Revenue and corrected the figures and the procedural handling of the issues, restoring them to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 114446 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 16-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-06-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANISH K. GUPTA
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER M. A. No. 14/Asr/2020 (Arising out of ITA No. 120/Asr/2013) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Hoshiarpur Circle, Hoshiarpur Vs. M/s The Hoshiarpur Central Coop. Bank Ltd., Railway Road, Hoshiarpur [PAN: AAAAT 0384K] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Manish K. Gupta, CA Respondent by: Sh. Hitendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 17.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 26.04.2023 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: The Miscellaneous Application was filed by the Revenue against the order of the ITAT dated 20.12.2019 in ITA No. 120Asr/2013. MA No. 14/Asr/2020 Dy. CIT v. M/s. The Hoshiarpur C. C. B. Ltd. 2 2. At the outset, the Ld. CIT (DR) submitted thatthere was a mistake in mention the figure of addition in para 7, on page 4 of the tribunal order that Ground no. 2 relate to deleting the addition of Rs. 1,25,00,000/- as against Rs. 6,00,75,946/- on account of standard loan disallowed by the AO which is further evident from the order of the CIT(A) who had granted the relief of Rs. 1,25,00,000/- only. The Ld. AR for the defendant has agreed to the contention of the revenue. Since, the above mistake pointed out by the Ld. CIT(DR) is apparent mistake and hence, the para 7 on page 4 of the Tribunal stands modified accordingly and therefore, the figure of disallowance of standard loan may be read as Rs. 1,25,00,000/-. 3. The next objection of the revenue is that the tribunal vide Para-11 of the Order, dismissed the revenue appeal for A.Y 2009-10, based on the discussion made in Para-10 of the Tribunal Order in the assessee’s own case in ITA no. 47/Asr/2011 and ITA no. 93/Asr/2011 dated 16.07.2018 for the A.Y-2007-08 which contrary to that decision as in that order in Para-10, quoted in the order itself, it is clearly stated that the issue is restored back to the A.O for fresh adjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The Ld. AR has agreed to the contention of the Ld. CIT(A). MA No. 14/Asr/2020 Dy. CIT v. M/s. The Hoshiarpur C. C. B. Ltd. 3 Accordingly, we hold that there was apparent mistake in the Para-11 of the order, and therefore, it stands modified and may be read as the issue is restored back to the A.O for fresh adjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity to the assessee instead of that the appeal of the revenue has been dismissed. 4. Again, the CIT (DR) submitted that the appeal filed by the assessee against the confirmation of two additions of Rs. 2,17,18,237/- and Rs. 2,58,57,709/- in ITA no. 121/Asr/2013 has been decided at page 9 to 11 of the Tribunal order, vide Paras 12 to 14. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee was only in respect of the above two additions but it has been observed at the end of Para 14 by the Tribunal that: “In view of this ground of appeal is set aside to the file of the A.O in entirety for reconsideration of the disallowances made at Rs. 6,00,75,946/- accordingly.” 4.1 Considering the factual mistakes apparent mistakes that there are two additions of Rs. 2,17,18,237/- and Rs. 2,58,57,709/- in ITA no. 121/Asr/2013 as it has been decided vide Paras 12 to 14 on page 9 to 11 of the Tribunal order, we hold that the tribunal order stands modified on the issue as under: MA No. 14/Asr/2020 Dy. CIT v. M/s. The Hoshiarpur C. C. B. Ltd. 4 “In view of this ground of appeal is set aside to the file of the A.O. for reconsideration of the disallowances made at Rs. 2,17,18,237/- and Rs. 2,58,57,709/- in ITA no. 121/Asr/2013 accordingly.” 5. Thus, it evident that there are mistakes apparent from the Order dated 20.12.2019 passed by Tribunal. Therefore, we accept the grievance of the revenue genuine and accordingly, the Tribunal order stands modified as above. 6. In the backdrop of the aforesaid discussion the Miscellaneous Application of the revenue is disposed of in the terms indicated as above. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.04.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr. PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT(A), (4) The CIT concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T (6) The Guard File True Copy By Order