ACIT, CHENNAI V. N.K.Mohnot, CHENNAI

MA 168/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5979 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: D ANAND

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI ... , . !', $ '% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER && / M.P. NO.168/MDS/2017 (IN I.T.A. NO.1385/MDS/2016) ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1991-92 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE -3, CHENNAI. V. SHRI N.K. MOHNOT, 38, COLLEGE ROAD, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI - 600 034. PAN : AACPN 2020 K (*+' /PETITIONER) (*,+-/ RESPONDENT) *+' / 0 /PETITIONER BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT *,+- / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE 1 / 2$ / DATE OF HEARING : 22.12.2017 34( / 2$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.12.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS P ETITION ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ORDER OF T HIS TRIBUNAL DATED 25.11.2016. 2 M.P. NO.168/MDS/17 2. SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT AN ADDITION OF 55,795/- BEING THE REFUND RECEIVED BY SHRI M.M. ENTERPRISES ON THE BAS IS OF FORGED TDS CERTIFICATE, THIS TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE THE OR DERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND REMITTED BACK THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER AFRESH, AFTER CONS IDERING THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IN CIT V. THANGAMANI AND THE TRIBUNALS DECISION IN THE ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1985-86 IN I.T.A. NO.2318/MDS/90. ACCORDING T O THE LD. D.R., THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ON VERIFICATION, FOUND THAT THERE WAS NO NEXUS BETWEEN THE ADDITION MADE IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL, THEREFORE, IT NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIE D. 3. WE HEARD SHRI D. ANAND, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE ALSO. AS SEEN FROM THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL AT P AGES 24 AND 25 AT PARA 26, THE MATTER WAS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER AFRESH AND THEREAF TER DECIDE THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER CONSIDERING THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IN CIT V. THANGAMANI AND THE DECI SION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE. HENCE, IT IS OPEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE FACTS OF THE PRESE NT CASE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW A FTER CONSIDERING 3 M.P. NO.168/MDS/17 THE JUDGMENT REFERRED ABOVE. THEREFORE, IT MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE AT THIS STAGE TO SAY THAT THERE WAS NO NEXUS BETWEE N THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DIRECTION OF THIS TRIBUNAL. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THIS TRIBUNAL DOES NOT FIND ANY ERROR MUCH LESS PRIMA FACIE ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 25.11.20 16. ACCORDINGLY, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS DISMISSE D AS DEVOID OF MERIT. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED COURT ON 28 TH DECEMBER, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !' ) ( ... ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 6 /DATED, THE 28 TH DECEMBER, 2017. KRI. / *27& 8&(2 /COPY TO: 1. *+' / PETITIONER 2. *,+- /RESPONDENT 3. 1 92 () /CIT(A) 4. 1 92 /CIT 5. &: *2 /DR 6. ;' < /GF.