The ACIT, Trivandrum V. Mr.Subramanian S, Trivandrum

MA 17/COCH/2021

AI Insights

The case involves a Miscellaneous Application by the Revenue concerning an earlier Tribunal order dated 12.02.2020, which had allowed the assessee's appeal for the Assessment Year 2009-10 for statistical purposes. The Revenue sought clarification on which authority should give effect to this order, citing a specific paragraph that mistakenly indicated the Assessing Officer as the responsible party. Both parties confirmed during the hearing that no consequential orders had been issued. The Tribunal corrected the record to state that the CIT(A) should reconsider the matter, thus allowing the Revenue's application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 115466 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: TELMA RAJU

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial Member MANo. 17/Coch/2021 (Arising out of ITA No. 529/Coch/2018) (Assessment Year:2009-10) Asst. CIT, Circle – 1(1) Thiruvananthapuram vs. Subramanian S. TC/20/40/12. House No. 106 Sastha Nagar, Karamana Thriuvananthapuram 695002 [PAN:AEMPP8295C] (Applicant) (Respondent) Applicant by: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Respondent by: Smt. Telma Raju, Advocate Date of Hearing: 18.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement:31.08.2023 O R D E R Per: Sanjay Arora, AM The instant Miscellaneous Application by the Revenue is in respect of the Order under section 254(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") dated 12.02.2020, allowing the assessee’s captioned appeal for Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10 for statistical purposes. 2. The Revenue has, quoting para 5 of the impugned order, which reads under, prayed to advise it as regards the authority, i.e., the Assessing Officer (AO) or the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who is to give effect to the said order: “5. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. Admittedly, this appeal was decided ex parte by the CIT(A). In my opinion, it is appropriate to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to prove his case before the CIT(A). Accordingly, the entire issue in dispute is remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The MP No. 17/Coch/2021 (AY: 2009-10) Subramanian S. vs. Asst. CIT 2 assessee shall co-operate with the Department and file necessary documents in support of his case. If the assessee fails to attend the hearing before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) has the liberty to take decision in accordance with law. At this stage, we refrain from going into other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee.” (emphasis, ours) 3. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the material of record. A careful reading of the order dated 12.02.2020, including para 5 thereof, makes it abundantly clear that a mistake has occurred in the Tribunal’s order in stating the authority to whom the matter is being remanded by it for fresh consideration. The same is, clearly, the first appellate authority passing the order under challenge before the Tribunal exparte. It was, on being asked to during hearing, allowing time for the purpose, confirmed by both the parties before us that no consequential order has yet been passed by either the assessing or the first appellate authority, i.e., giving effect to the impugned order. Sentence 3 of para 5 thereof is accordingly modified as under: “Accordingly, the entire issue in dispute is remitted to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.” The instant miscellaneous application is disposed of accordingly. 4. In the result,the Revenue’s miscellaneous petition is allowed. Order pronounced on August 31, 2023 under Rule 34 of The Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. Sd/- Sd/- (Manomohan Das) (Sanjay Arora) Judicial Member Accountant Member Cochin, Dated: August 31, 2023 Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The Pr. CIT concerned By Order 4. The Sr. DR, ITAT, Cochin 5. Guard File Assistant Registrar ITAT, Cochin n.p.