RAHAMATHULLA ASKAR, VELLORE V. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VELLORE

MA 167/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5555 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A. SUNDARARAJAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI . . . , , [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ] M.P.NO.167/CHNY/2019 (IN ./I.T.A. NO.3050/CHNY/2018) ! / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-2016. SHRI. RAHAMATHULA ASKAR, NO. F2, 7B, BANGIKHAN STREET, AMBUR 635 802. VELLORE DIST. VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1, VELLORE [PAN AGGPR 7294D] (PETITIONER) ( /RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI. T.N. SEETHARAMAN, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. A. SUNDARARAJAN, ADDL. CIT. ' # $ % /DATE OF HEARING : 20-09-2019 &'! $ % /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11-10-2019 / O R D E R PER INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E SEEKING MODIFICATION OF THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL ORD ER DATED 23.04.2019 IN ITA NO. 3050/CHNY/2018 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015- 2016. MP NO.167/2019 :- 2 -: 2. LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE CONTENDED THAT IN PA RA 7 AT PAGE 5 OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER, THE TRIBUNAL HAD RECORDED A FINDING THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT TAKEN A PLEA THAT NO SINGLE PAYMEN T EXCEEDED A20,000/- IN A DAY BEFORE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND NO EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PLEA WAS PLACED BEFORE LOWER AUTHO RITIES. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THIS FIND ING OF THE TRIBUNAL IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS AND DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO PARA 17 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 3. PER CONTRA, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITT ED THAT THERE WERE NO MISTAKES IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AMENABLE TO ANY RECTIFICATION. 4. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MISCELL ANEOUS PETITION AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER. NO DOUBT FROM THE PERUSAL OF PARA 17 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IT IS CLEAR THAT ASSES SEE HAD FILED CERTAIN LEDGER COPIES BUT IT IS NOT CLEAR WHETHER ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN A PLEA BEFORE LOWER AUTHORITIES THAT NO SINGLE PAYMENT EX CEEDED A20,000/-. SIMILARLY NOTHING IS SHOWN TO US TO SHOW THAT THIS PLEA WAS TAKEN BEFORE LD. CIT(A). FURTHERMORE, THERE IS NOTHING O N RECORD TO SHOW THAT LEDGER COPIES FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFI CER ARE SAME AS FILED BEFORE US. ASSESSEE HAD NOT SUBSTANTIATED THAT LED GER COPIES FILED MP NO.167/2019 :- 3 -: BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ARE SAME AS WHAT WAS FILED BEFO RE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS BENEFIT O F DISCUSSION AS TO FACTS SURROUNDING THE CASH PAYMENTS. HE SIMPLY DISCUSSE D THE CASE LAWS OR REPRODUCED LIST OF THE CASE LAWS WITHOUT DISCUSSING AS TO HOW THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE FITS TO THOSE CASES. THUS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MISTAKE IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE ASSESSEE, IN TH E GUISE OF SEEKING RECTIFICATION IS ONLY SEEKING REVIEW OF THE DECIS ION OF THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 254 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( # / CHENNAI ) / DATED: 11TH OCTOBER, 2019. KV $ +%,- .-!% / COPY TO: 1 . /0 / APPELLANT 3. ' 1% () / CIT(A) 5. -4 +%5 / DR 2. +6 /0 / RESPONDENT 4. ' 1% / CIT 6. 7 8# / GF