The ITO, Tirur V. M/s. Ananthavoor Co-op Bank Ltd, Malappuram

MA 154/COCH/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5273 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 30-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B SAJJIV
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 80P; 201; 254(2); 43; 153; 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJAR I, AM & SHRI GEORGE MATHAN , JM M A NO. 1 51 /COCH/20 20 : ASST.YEAR 200 9 - 20 1 0 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 440 /COCH/201 6 ) M A NO. 1 52 /COCH/20 20 : ASST.YEAR 201 0 - 201 1 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.4 41 /COCH/201 6 ) M A NO. 153 /COCH/20 20 : ASST.YEAR 2011 - 2012 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 442 /COCH/2016) M A NO. 15 4 /COCH/20 20 : ASST.YEAR 201 2 - 201 3 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.4 43 /COCH/2016) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 TIRUR. VS. M/S. ANATHAVOOR SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, ANATHAVOOR PO MALAPPURAM PAN : AADAA0368F . ( APPLICANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SRI.B.SAJJIV, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY : -- NONE --- DATE OF HEARING : 09.10.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09 .10.2020 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JM : THESE ARE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE COMMON ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 440 TO 443 /COCH/201 6 DATED 22 ND MARCH, 2017 . 2. SRI.B.SAJJIV, SR.DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE . NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION BY THE LEARNED DR THAT THE ISSUE IN APPEAL WAS IN RESPECT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAVE ORIGINALLY DISMISSED THE REVENUES APPEAL BY FO LLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE M A NO S . 1 51 - 154 /COCH /20 20. M/S. ANATHAVOOR SCB LIMITED. 2 KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE CHIRAKKAL SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. AND OTHERS V. ITO [(2016) 384 ITR 490 (KER.)] . IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT SUBSEQUENTLY THE FULL BENCH OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS PASSED AN ORDER DATED 19.03.2019 IN ITA NO.97 OF 2016 IN THE CASE OF THE MAVILAYI SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. V. CIT [(2019) 414 ITR 67 (KER.) (FB) (HC)] , WHEREIN THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT ITS EARLIER DECISION IN THE CASE OF THE CHIRAKKAL SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. AND OTHERS (SUPRA) IS NOT GOOD LAW AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY INTO THE FACTUAL SITUATION AS TO THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE - SOCIETY AND ARRIVE AT A CONCLUSION WHETHER THE BENEFITS C AN BE EXTENDED OR NOT IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SUB - SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P OF THE ACT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE SUBSEQUENT BINDING OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WHICH HAS REVERSED THE EARLIER DECISION, DOES CONSTITUTE A MISTAK E APPARENT FROM RECORD AND THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS WERE LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED. 4 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE TRIBUNAL IS A CREATURE OF THE STATU T E. IT HAS NOT HAVING THE POWER TO READ IN OR READ OUT OF A PROVISION OF LAW. THE LEG ISLATURE IN ITS WISDOM HAS LAID DOWN THE LAW AND THE SPECIFIC PROVISION RELATING TO THE POWERS OF THE RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKES IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS IN SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961. ADMITTEDLY, THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS DATED 22 ND MARCH, 2017 . THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN FILED ON 30.09.2019. THE SIX MONTH PERIOD IN THE PRESENT CASE EXPIRED ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2017 . M A NO S . 1 51 - 154 /COCH /20 20. M/S. ANATHAVOOR SCB LIMITED. 3 5 . HERE WE MUST SPECIFICALLY MENTION THAT THE READING OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(2), WHICH READS AS FOLLOW: - 254(2) THE APPELLATE 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. 6 . IT SHOWS THAT THE TIME LIMIT OF SIX MONTH IS BINDING ON THE HANDS OF THE TRIBUNAL. THIS IS IN LINE WITH THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PRINCIPAL CIT V. ITAT [WRIT PETITION NO.2858 OF 2019 DATED 24.01.2020]. 7 . THIS BEING SO, AS SIX MONTH PERIOD FROM THE END OF THE MONTH IN WHICH THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED HAS EXPIRED, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NOS. 440 - 443 /COCH/201 6 CANNOT BE AMENDED BY THE TRIBUNAL. CONSEQUENTLY, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE REVENU E STAND DISMISSED. 8 . IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 9 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020 . SD/ - SD/ - ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ( GEORGE MATHAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER COCHIN ; DATED : 9 TH OCTOBER, 2020 . DEVADAS G* M A NO S . 1 51 - 154 /COCH /20 20. M/S. ANATHAVOOR SCB LIMITED. 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, AR/ ITAT, COCHIN 1. THE APPLICANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) KOZHIKODE. 4. THE PR.CIT KOZHIKODE. 5. DR, ITAT, COCHIN 6 . GUARD FILE.