The ITO, Ward-9(1), Surat V. M/s. Balar Gems, Surat

MA 158/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9212 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y P VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: M J SHAH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI D. K. TYAGI, JM AND A. MOHAN ALANKAMON Y, AM) M.A. NO.158/AHD/2012 (IN ITA NO.670/AHD/2012: A.Y.: 2006-07) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 9 (1), ROOM NO.422, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT VS M/S. BALAR GEMS, 329-30. KRINKTOWER, SARDAR CHOWK 395 006 VARACHHA ROAD, SURAT P. A. NO. AACFB 9460 F (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI Y. P. VERMA, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY SHRI M. J. SHAH, AR DATE OF HEARING: 02-11-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09-11-2012 O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY: THIS MISC. APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE REVENUE REQUESTING FOR RECTIFICATION O F THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 20-07-2012 PASSED IN ITA NO. 670/AHD /2012. 2. THE REVENUE IN THIS MISC. APPLICATION HAS STATED THAT FORM THE FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING OF THE REVE NUES APPEAL IN ITA NO.670/AHD/2012 DATED 20-07-2012, IT IS APPARENT TH AT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAS BEEN ALLOWED WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: BASED ON OUR ABOVE DISCUSSIONS AND THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT AND THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH CO URT CITED SUPRA, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE PENAL TY LEVIED BY THE LEARNED AO FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULAR S BY INVOKING PROCEEDINGS U/S. 271 (1) ( C) OF THE ACT IS JUSTIFI ED AND THEREFORE WE UPHOLD THE SAME. M. A. NO.158/AHD/2012 - (IN ITA NO.670/AHD/2012 (AY : 2006-07) ITO W-9(1) VS M/S. BALAR GEMS 2 IT WAS, FURTHER PLEADED BY THE APPLICANT THAT IN PA RA 11 OF THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IT WAS STATED THAT IN THE RE SULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED INSTEAD OF STATING IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED AND PRAYED THAT THIS APPARENT MISTAKE MAY BE RECTIFIED. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GONE THR OUGH THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 20-07-2012 IN ITA NO.67 0/AHD/2012. ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER IT IS FOUND THAT BY INADVERTEN T OVERSIGHT IN PARA 11 OF THE AFORESAID ORDER THE MISTAKE POINTED OUT B Y THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN COMMITTED WHICH AMOUNTS TO BE AN APPARENT MIST AKE WHICH REQUIRES TO BE RECTIFIED BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, WE HEREBY RECTIFY THE MISTAKE A ND ACCORDINGLY HOLD THAT PARA 11 OF THE AFORESAID ORDER SHOULD HEN CEFORTH BE READ AS UNDER:- 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED . 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E REVENUE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09-11-2012 SD/- SD/- (D. K. TYAGI) JUDICIAL MEMBER (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA DEKA/ DEKA/ DEKA/ DEKA/ M. A. NO.158/AHD/2012 - (IN ITA NO.670/AHD/2012 (AY : 2006-07) ITO W-9(1) VS M/S. BALAR GEMS 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER A SST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: 02-11-2012 (DIRECT ON COMPUTE R) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 05-11-2012/06-11-12 OTHER MEMB ER: 3. DATE ON WHICH APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P.S ./P.S.: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S./P.S.: 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK: 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: