Dy. Commissioner of Income tax, Nashik V. Samartha Sahakari Bank Ltd, Nashik

MA 15/PUN/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4377 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 19-01-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No. 15/PUN/2022 ( Arising out of ITA No. 873/PUN/2017 ) Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dy. CIT Cir. 1, Nashik Applicant V/s. Shri Samarth Sahakari Bnk Ltd. 1m Naroshankar, Rajebahadur Building M.G. Road, Nasik 422 013. PAN; AAAAS3116Q Respondent Applicant by : Shri S.P. Walimbe Respondent by : Shri Sanket Joshi Date of Hearing : 06-05-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 11-05-2022 ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: This Miscellaneous Application has been preferred by the Revenue u/s.254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) with a prayer to recall the order of Tribunal in ITA No. 873/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2013-14 dated 06-01-2020. 2. At the very outset, It is the contention of the ld. D.R that there is an apparent error in the order of the Tribunal passed in ITA No. 873/PUN/2017 for A.Y. 2013-14 dated 07-01-2020, inasmuch as the judgment of Karnataka High Court in the case of Bellad Basewadi Urban Sovhard Sahakari Bank Vs. CIT in ITA No. 100168/2015 dated 29-01-2018 has erroneously been relied on by the Tribunal while granting relief to the assessee. According to the ld. D.R the judgment nowhere states that provision of standard deduction is to be amalgamated with provision of BDDR for allowing claim u/s 36(1)(viia) of the Act. 2 MA No.15 /PUN/2022 Samarth Sah. Bank Ltd. A.Y. 2013-14 3. After hearing both the parties, the Tribunal has granted relief to the assessee following the judgment of Karnataka High Court (supra) which judgment has not been set aside/overruled/stayed by Higher Judicial forum. The contention of the ld. D.R is beyond the scope and ambit of M.A. jurisdiction of the Tribunal u/s 254(2) of the Act. This cannot be termed as a mistake apparent from record. Hence the Misc. application of the Revenue is dismissed. 4. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on 11 th day of May 2022 Sd/- sd/- INTURI RAMA RAO PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune; Dated : 11 th day of May 2022 Ankam Copy of the Order forwarded t 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(Appeals)-1 Nasik 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Nasik 5. DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. Guard File. BY ORDER, Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Pune. 3 MA No.15 /PUN/2022 Samarth Sah. Bank Ltd. A.Y. 2013-14 Date 1 Draft dictated on 09-05-2022 Sr.PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 09-05-2022 Sr.PS/PS 3 Draft proposed and placed before the second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by second Member AM/JM 5 Approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr.PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on 11-05-2022 Sr.PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of order 11-05-2022 Sr.PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk 11-05-2022 Sr.PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R 11 Date of dispatch of order