Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5266 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
5 year(s) 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date
23-08-2019
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
DB
Assessment Year
2005-2006
Appeal Filed On
26-05-2014
Judgement Text
, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT [CONDUCTED THROUGH E COURT AT AHMEDABAD] BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISC. APPLICATION NO.16/RJT/2014 IN IT(SS)A NO.29/RJT/2006 / ASSTT.YEAR : [BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1988 TO 24.2.1999] BALUBHAI V. PARMAR SURVA KRITI SOCIETY NO.2 NR. HRISHIKESH VIDYALAYA MORBI PAN : AORPP2151E VS. A CIT, CIRCLE - 5 RAJKOT. ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONENT ) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI PRAVEEN VERMA, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 20/08/2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23/08/2019 .// O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION IS DIRECTED AT THE INSTAN CE OF THE ASSESSEE POINTING OUT APPARENT ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRI BUNAL DATED 3.12.2010 PASSED IN IT(SS)A.NO.29/RJT/2006. 2. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI D.R. ADHIA , HAS APPLIED FOR ADJOURNMENT ON THE GROUND THAT HE HAS BEEN SUFFERIN G FROM BACK-PAIN, AND THEREFORE, ADVISED REST. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE T HAT SHRI ADHIA IS A SENIOR CITIZEN AND RETIRED LONG BACK FROM THE GOVERNMENT S ERVICES, AND THEREAFTER STARTED PRACTICE AS CONSULTANT/INCOME-TAX PRACTITIO NER. HE HAS APPEARED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL LONG BACK, BUT ON ACCOUNT OF HIS HEARI NG IMPAIRMENT HE USED TO MA NO.16/RJT/2014 2 FILE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ONLY. THIS MA WAS FILED L ONG BACK IN THE YEAR 2014, AND SINCE THEN UNNECESSARILY PENDING IN THE TRIBUNA L. THE OLD-AGE WOULD ALWAYS GIVE RISE TO SOME KIND OF AGE RELATED PROBLE M IN PRACTICAL LIFE, BUT WE CANNOT KEEP ON ADJOURNING THE MATTER ON SUCH REQUES T. THEREFORE, WE REJECT HIS APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT AND PROCEED TO DECI DE THE MA ON MERIT. 3. IT EMERGES OUT FROM THE RECORD THAT A SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 24.2.1999. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, CERTAIN PAPERS WERE SEIZED AND STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WA S RECORDED. ON THE BASIS OF REPLY GIVEN TO QUESTION NO.20, AN ADDITION OF RS .5,71,400/- WAS MADE. THIS WAS THE ALLEGED PROFIT FROM TRADING OF AGRICULTURE PRODUCE. THE ASSESSEE WAS CONFRONTED WITH REGARD TO THAT PROFIT AT RS.6,00,01 2/-. HOWEVER, ADDITION OF RS.5,71,400/- WAS MADE. THE TRIBUNAL FOUND, AS A M ATTER OF FACT THAT CERTAIN PART OF THIS PROFIT DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE BLOCK PERIOD, AND THEREFORE, GIVEN DIRECTION TO THE AO TO CONFIRM THE ADDITION ONLY OF THOSE PROFIT WHICH FALL WITHIN THE BLOCK PERIOD. ACCORDING TO THE MA FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE AO HAS GIVEN EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND C ONFIRMED ADDITION OF RS.1,81,730/- AS AGAINST RS.5,71,400/- ORIGINALLY M ADE. IN THE APPLICATION IT HAS BEEN PLEADED THAT EVEN THIS RS.1,81,730/- OUGHT NOT TO BE MADE BECAUSE ACCORDING TO HIM, IT IS NOT PERTAINED TO HIM. A RE FERENCE TO THE KISHOR DIARY PAGE NOS.1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 AND 13 WAS MADE. 4. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE POWER OF RECTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT CAN BE EXERCISED ONLY WHEN THE MISTAKE, WHICH IS SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED, IS AN OBVIOUS PATENT MISTAKE, WHICH IS APPARENT FROM THE RECORD AND NOT A MISTAKE, WHICH IS REQUIRED TO BE ESTABLISHED BY ARGUMENTS AN D LONG DRAWN PROCESS OF REASONING ON POINTS, ON WHICH THERE MAY CONCEIVABLY BE TWO OPINIONS. MA NO.16/RJT/2014 3 5. A PERUSAL OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER WOULD REVEAL T HAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDERED ALL THESE MATERIALS AS WELL AS THE STATE MENT OF THE ASSESSEE, AND THEREAFTER RECORDED A FINDING OF THE FACT, WHICH CO ULD NOT BE REVIEWED IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. IF TH E ASSESSEE HAS ANY GRIEVANCE, IT SHOULD HAVE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE TH E HIGHER FORUM AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THERE IS NO APPARENT ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, AND ACCORDINGLY, APPLICATION IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, MA OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 23 RD AUGUST, 2019 AT AHMEDABAD. S D / - (AMARJIT SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S D / - (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER
