The ITO, Ward-3(2)(10), Ahmedabad V. M/s. Shree Ganesh Builders, Ahmedabad

MA 141/AHD/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3756 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 28-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V.K. SINGH
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

, ‘B’ । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No. 141/Ahd/2021 (in M.A. No. 63/Ahd/2020 & in ITA No. 663/Ahd/2018) ( Assess ment Ye ar : 2010-11) Th e IT O W ar d- 3( 2) (1 0), A h me dab ad / V s . M / s. S hre e Ga ne sh Bu il der s 67, G ok ul dh a m S oc iet y, Op p: S mr uti Man di r, Gh od asa r, A h med a bad / र /P A N / G IR N o . : A A E F M 1 1 8 6 H ( Appellant) . . ( / Respondent) र /Appellant by : Shri V. K. Singh, Sr. D.R. र / Respondent by : Shri S. N. Divatia, A.R. र D a t e o f H e a r i n g 03/06/2022 !"# र /D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t 29/06/2022 ORDER PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JM: This present miscellaneous applications has been filed against the miscellaneous application already decided by ITAT vide M.A. No. 63/Ahd/2020 and said miscellaneous application was decided against the Revenue. MA Nos. 141/Ahd/2021 [ITO vs. M/s. Shree Ganesh Builders] AY 2010-11 - 2 - 2. Now, Revenue has come again before the Tribunal against the said miscellaneous application. 3. We have heard both the parties and gone through the miscellaneous application. As per section 254(1), the Tribunal may, after giving both the parties to the appeal an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit. 3.1 Section 254(2) provides that the Tribunal may, at any time within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it under sub-section (1), and shall make such amendment if the mistake is brought to its notice by the assessee or the Assessing Officer. 3.2 As is clear from language in section 254(2), the mistake apparent in Order passed under section 254(1) can rectified by the Tribunal. The issue arises is whether Miscellenous Application (“MA”) can be filed against Order passed by Tribunal in earlier MA 3.3 This issue has been dealt in the following cases: i. Padam Prakash (HUF) v ITO (ITAT – SB Delhi) (2011) 131 ITD 121, 9 taxmann.com 178 – The Tribunal held that S. 254 (2) can be invoked only if there is a mistake in the order passed by the Tribunal u/s 254(1). As the MA filed by the assessee is against an order passed u/s 254(2) it has to be rejected ii. CIT vs. President, ITAT 196 ITR 838 (Ori) – HC held that Order rejecting MA cannot be rectified u/s 254(2). MA Nos. 141/Ahd/2021 [ITO vs. M/s. Shree Ganesh Builders] AY 2010-11 - 3 - In view of above, the miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 4. In the result, the miscellaneous applications filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- ( ANNAP UR NA GUP TA) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACC OUNTANT MEMB ER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 29/06/2022 True Copy S.K.SINHA ेश ! " #े" / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- $ र / Revenue 2 द / Assessee ' ( )* र + / Concerned CIT 4 र + - / CIT (A) . / 0 1 2 2 )*3 र )* र#3 45द ( द / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6 1 78 9 / Guard file. By order/ द श 3 उ / 4 र र )* र#3 45द ( द । This Order pronounced in Open Court on 29/06/2022