M/s Al- Karam Associates, Bangalore V. ACIT, Bangalore

MA 16/BANG/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7946 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B SARAVANAN
• Assessee Lawyers: R CHANDRASHEKAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH A BEFORE SHRI N BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE RESIDENT AND SMT. P MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P NO.16 /BANG/2012 (IN ITA NO.105/BANG/2011) (ASST. YEAR - 2007-08) M/S A1-KARAM ASSOCIATES, NO.18/1, ALBERT STREET, RICHMOND TOWN, BANGALORE. . APPELLANT VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE. . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI R CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B SARAVANAN, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 04-05-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04-05-2012 O R D E R PER SMT. P MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS MISC. PETITION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 25 4(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT SEEKING RECTIFICATION OF ALLEGED MI STAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 105/BANG/2011 DATED 23.01.2012. M.P NO.16/B/12 2 2. ACCORDING THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE TRIBUNAL OUGHT NOT TO HAVE DIRECTED THE CIT(A) TO CALL FOR A REMAND REPORT, AS THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS PENALTY APPEAL A ND NOT THE QUANTUM APPEAL. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE IN THE MISC. PETITI ON, WHILE THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO MISTAKE APPA RENT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 4. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVING CONSID ERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE FIND THAT THE APPEAL WAS HEARD AND ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOT H THE PARTIES ON 23.1.2012. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE W AS VERY MUCH PRESENT AT THE TIME OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE ORDER A ND HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION AT THAT TIME. FURTHER, WHAT THE ASSE SSEE IS SEEKING THROUGH THIS MISC. PETITION IS REVIEW OF THE ORDER, WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE U/S 254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. IN V IEW OF THE SAME, WE DO NOT SEE ANY MERIT IN THE APPLICATION OF THE A SSESSEE AND IS ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. M.P NO.16/B/12 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. PETITION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING. SD/- SD/- (N BARATHVAJA SANKAR) (P MADHAVI DEVI) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER VMS. BANGALORE DATED : 04/05/2012 COPY TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE REVENUE 3.THE CIT CONCERNED. 4.THE CIT(A) CONCERNED. 5.DR 6.GF BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, I TAT, BANGALORE.