THIAGARAJAR MILLS LIMITED, MADURAI V. ACIT COMPANY CIRCLE I, MADURAI

MA 17/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 102 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0806 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 12-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 27-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Question of law
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ ᭠यायपीठ, चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ᮰ी वी दुगाᭅ राव, ᭠याियक सद᭭य एवं ᮰ी मंजुनाथ. जी, लेखा सद᭭य के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Misc. Application No. 15/Chny/2020 [In ITA No. 426/Chny/2007] (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2003-04) & Misc. Application No. 16/Chny/2020 [In ITA No. 1801/Chny/2007] (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & Misc. Application No. 17/Chny/2020 [In ITA No. 1160/Chny/2007] (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2004-05) & Misc. Application No. 18/Chny/2020 [In CO No. 104/Chny/2007 in ITA No: 1801/Chny/2007] (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & Misc. Application No. 91/Chny/2020 [In ITA No. 984/Chny/2007] (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/s. Thiagarajar Mills Ltd., Kappalur, Madurai – 625 008. [PAN: AAACT-4304-R] v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle –I, Madurai. (ᮧाथᭅक /Petitioner) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) ᮧाथᭅक कᳱ ओरसे/ Petitioner by : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate & Shri. G. Tarun, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 13.10.2023 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 13.10.2023 :-2-: MA. Nos: 15, 16, 17, 18 & 91/Chny/2020 आदेश /O R D E R PER MANJUNATHA. G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee u/s. 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) are directed against order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 426/Chny/2007, ITA No. 1801/Chny/2007, ITA No. 1160/Chny/2007, CO No. 104/Chny/2007 & ITA No. 984/Chny/2007, dated 05.12.2019 & 05.02.2020 and pertains to assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05. 2. The assessee has narrated facts of its case and mistakes stated to be apparent on record from the orders of the tribunal dated 05.12.2019 & 05.02.2020 and relevant contents of Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee for assessment year 2002-03 are reproduced as under: “1. This humble application submitted by the Applicant/Appellant for the kind consideration of the Hon'ble Tribunal states as follows: 2. The appeal came up for hearing before the Hon'ble 'B' Bench on 18-11-2019 and the Bench declared the case as heard in ITA 984/Mds/2007 relating to 2004-05.The issue of addition to opening stock arose in the appeal in ITA 984/2007 and not in ITA 1160/2007 as mentioned in the order of the Tribunal dated 05/12/2019 now received. When the Bench Clerk wanted our Counsel to sign the order sheet for noting the adjournment of other matters to 02/12/2019, he took the file before the Bench and submitted that as per the High Court order two appeals have been mentioned in the body of their judgment i.e. TCA 1125 and 1128/2009 and that only in TCA 1128/2009 the Hon 'ble High :-3-: MA. Nos: 15, 16, 17, 18 & 91/Chny/2020 Court remitted the matter to the Tribunal. In other matter in TCA 1125 of 2009 the issue was concluded saying that no substantial question of law arises at present. Hence on 02/12/2019 there was nothing for our Counsel to argue and no matter is remitted to the Tribunal for adjudication in other appeals. The Bench agreed with our Counsel and directed that the Departmental Representative will file a report on 02/12/2019. Our Counsel did not sign the order sheet on this account as our Counsel was not required to be present. Hence to say in the order dated 05/12/2019 now received on 21/12/2019 that none appeared for the assesse is factually wrong. Our Counsel had effectively no notice of the hearing on 02/12/2019 after his submission to the predecessor Bench which had heard the matter fully and now considered in this order. The order was received on 21/12/2019 and the application is in time. 3. In para 2 of the order reference to ITA No. 1160/Mds/2007 for assessment year 2004-05 is not correct. The correct number is ITA 984 of 2007. 4. In para 6 of the order dated 05/12/2019 it has been mentioned that when the appeal was called up for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assesse despite service of notice as well as direction of the Hon'ble High Court to appear before the Tribunal at the first instance on 17/10/2019 or any other subsequent hearing. This is factually incorrect. The Hon'ble Tribunal posted the case only on 18/11/2019 and on that day our Counsel appeared and argued the matter and explained the case relating to assessment year 2004-05 after submitting copies of the jurisdictional High Court judgment in Kaderi Ambal Mills Ltd case referred to by the High Court while remitting the matter to the Hon'ble Tribunal. The Hon'ble Bench also declared the case as heard. In respect of other years the High Court did not deal with them in the body of the order and therefore reference to all the appeals only refer to the appeals discussed in the body of the order. I also submitted to the Bench that I am filing a review petition in the High Court as soon as I get the certified copy. As mentioned in the first paragraph above, other matters are not remitted to the Tribunal by the High Court which the predecessor Bench agreed with me and did not want me to appear on 2/12/2019 because Departmental Representative was directed to file a report. Para 12 of the Tribunal's order therefore requires rectification. 6. As these facts have escaped the attention of the Hon'ble Bench there is a mistake apparent from records. Hence it is prayed that these facts omitted to be considered and which have a material bearing on the conclusions may please be considered and justice rendered. A copy of the Order of the Tribunal and Challan for payment of Rs 50/- for each appeal are enclosed.” :-4-: MA. Nos: 15, 16, 17, 18 & 91/Chny/2020 3. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate & Shri. G. Tarun, Advocate, has submitted that the assessee wants to withdraw the petitions filed u/s. 254(2) of the Act to recall the order of the Tribunal. The ld. DR, present for the revenue has no objections for withdrawal of Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee. Therefore, Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee for assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05 has been dismissed as withdrawn. 4. In the result, Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee for assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05 are dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the court on 13 th October, 2023 at Chennai. Sd/- (वी दुगाᭅ राव) (V. DURGA RAO) ᭠याियकसद᭭य/Judicial Member Sd/- (मंजुनाथ. जी) (MANJUNATHA. G) लेखासद᭭य/Accountant Member चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated: 13 th October, 2023 JPV आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुᲦ/CIT 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध/DR 5. गाडᭅ फाईल/GF