ACIT, Ludhiana V. M/s Avery Cycle Industries, Ludhiana

MA 151/CHANDI/2005

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8583 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 3 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 1995-1996
• Appeal Filed On: 08-04-2005
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI
• Keywords: Rectification of order

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L. KARWA, VP AND SHRI T.R. SOOD, AM MISC. APPLICATION NO. 151/CHD/2005 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 1040/CHD/1998, 616/CHD/1999 & 1179/CHD/1998 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1995-96 & 1996-97 A.C.I.T. CIRCLE CIRCLE-III V. M/S AVERY CYCLE IND USTRIES LUDHIANA LUDHIANA PAN: (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI N.K. SAINI RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 13.07.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31.07.2012 ORDER PER T.R. SOOD, A.M NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOT ICE AND SINCE THE MATTER IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREM E COURT, WE DECIDED TO HEAR THE MISC. APPLICATION EXPARTE. 2 THROUGH THIS MISC. APPLICATION THE REVENUE HAS SOUG HT RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE. THE APPLICATION OF REVENUE IS ROUNDED INT O 15 PAGES WHICH ITSELF SHOWS THAT ERROR IS NOT APPARENT FROM RECORD AND TH E SAME HAS TO BE FOUND OUT BY AN ELABORATE PROCESS OF REASONING. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF ITO V. VOLKART BROTHERS AND OTHERS, 82 ITR 50 (SC) HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER:- A MISTAKE APPARENT ON THE RECORD MUST BE AN OBVIOU S AND PATENT MISTAKE AND NOT SOMETHING WHICH CAN BE ESTABLISHED BY A LONG DRAWN PROCESS OF REASONING ON POINTS ON WHICH THERE MAY B E CONCEIVABLY TWO OPINIONS. A DECISION ON A DEBATABLE POINT OF LAW I S NOT A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD. 3. THUS IN THE PRESENT ORDER NO CLEAR CUT ERROR HAS BEEN POINTED OUT AND ONCE SUCH VOLUMINOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE WHIC H SHOWS THAT SOME DEBATABLE POINTS WERE INVOLVED WHICH CAN NOT BE CAL LED APPARENT FROM RECORD. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DECISION OF HON'BLE APEX COURT, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THERE IS NO ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 2 1179/CHD/1998, A.Y 1995-96 DATED 3.3.2005 AND ACCOR DINGLY WE DECLINE TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL. 6. IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 31.07.2012 SD/- SD/- (H.L. KARWA) (T.R. SOOD) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEM BER DATED: 31.07.2012 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/ THE DR 3