M/s I ndian School of Business, Hyderabad V. ADIT (Exemptions)-1, Hyderabad

MA 175/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9390 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 17-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M H NAIK
• Keywords: Rectification of order

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER MISC. APPLN. NO.175/HYD/2012 (IN ITA NO.480/HYD/2011) : ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 M/S. INDIAN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, HYDERABAD ( PAN - AAACI 6797 H ) V/S. ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME- TAX(EXEMPTION) I, HYDERABAD (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI G.V.N.HARI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M.H.NAIK DATE OF HEARING 12.10.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 31.10.2012 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: BY THIS APPLICATION UNDER S.254(2) OF THE INCOME -TAX ACT, 1961, THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE SEEKS RECALL OF THE EX-PARTE ORD ER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 4.5.2012 IN ITA NO.480/HYD/2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, ON THE GROUND THAT CERTAIN MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD HAS CREPT INTO THE SAME. 2. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE A SSESSEE REITERATING THE AVERMENTS MADE IN THE PRESENT APPLICATION SUBMI TTED THAT HEARING ON THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BEING ITA NO .480/HYD/2011, WAS ADJOURNED TO 18 TH APRIL, 2012, AS PER NOTICE OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 2 5.1.2012. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE FURNISHE D THE INFORMATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF HARING IN WRITING WITH THE REGISTRY ON 1 7 TH APRIL, 2012 AND PERSONALLY ATTENDED ON THE DAY OF HEARING, I.E. ON 18 TH APRIL, 2012 AT 10.30 A.M. AT THE TIME OF PROCEEDINGS, AND IT WAS INFORMED THAT THE CASE W AS ADJOURNED TO 30 TH JULY, 2012. HOWEVER, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL PASSED ITS ORDER DATED 4.5.2012, STATING THAT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF T HE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF MISC. APPLN. NO.175/HYD.2012(IN ITA NO480/HYD/11 M/S. INDIAN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, HYDERABAD 2 HEARING, QUOTING 23.4.2012 AS THE DATE OF HEARING I N THE CAUSE TITLE AS WELL AS IN THE BODY OF THE ORDER IN THE OPENING SENTENCE OF PA RA-3 ON PAGE-2 THEREOF. THE DATE 23.4.2012 THUS MENTIONED IN THE ORDER IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE DATE MENTIONED IN THE NOTICE OF HEARING, AND THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS REQUIRED TO BE RECALLED, IN AS MUCH AS THE AUTHORIS ED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ATTENDING THE HEARINGS AND FURNIS HING THE NECESSARY INFORMATION FROM TIME TO TIME. 3. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, SUBMI TTING THAT THERE IS NO MATERIAL MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, THOUGH THERE APPEARS A TECHNICAL MISTAKE IN MENTIONING THE DATE OF HEARING AS 23.4.2012 INSTE AD OF AS 18.4.2012 WHICH ALONE NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED. SINCE NO MISTAKE ON T HE MERITS OF THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN POINTED OUT IN TH E ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 4.5.2012, IT IS NOT A FIT CASE FOR THE RECALL OF TH E ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, AND MERE RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE WITH REGARD TO DATE OF HEA RING WOULD BE SUFFICE. 4. WE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND PURSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD WITH REFERENCE TO THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 4.5.2 012. WE AGREE WITH THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THERE IS AN INADVERTENT MISTAKE IN MENTIONING THE DATE OF HEARING AS 23.4. 2012 INSTEAD OF AS 18.4.2012 IN THE CAUSE-TITLE AS WELL AS IN THE OP ENING SENTENCE OF PARA-3 ON PAGE 2 OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 4.5.2012 . ON VERIFICATION OF THE RECORDS, WE FIND THAT EVEN ON 18.4.2012 NONE APPEAR ED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED OUT, AND AS SUCH , WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE STATEMENT MADE IN THE ORDER THAT NON E APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE. WE HAVE CONSI DERED ALL THE MATERIAL THAT IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND THERE IS NO ALLEGATION TO T HE CONTRARY MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT APPLICATION. IN THE CIRCUM STANCES, BUT FOR THE INADVERTENT MISTAKE WHICH HAS CREPT INTO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WITH REGARD TO THE DATE OF HEARING, NO OTHER MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD WHICH HAS A BEARING MISC. APPLN. NO.175/HYD.2012(IN ITA NO480/HYD/11 M/S. INDIAN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, HYDERABAD 3 ON THE MERITS OF THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE TRIBU NAL ON THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTIC E. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO RECALL OUR ORDER DATED 4.5.2012 , AS IT WOULD SUFFICE THE PURPOSE, IF THE MISTAKES IN RELATION TO INCORRECT D ATE OF HEARING NOTED ABOVE ARE RECTIFIED. WE ACCORDINGLY, RECTIFY OUR ORDER AND DI RECT THAT THE DATE OF HEARING MENTIONED IN THE CAUSE TITLE AND ALSO IN THE OPENIN G SENTENCE OF PARA 3 ON PAGE 2 OF OUR ORDER DATED 4.5.2012, SHOULD BE CORRECTED AND READ AS 18.4.2012 INSTEAD OF AS 23.4.2012 . WE ACCORDINGLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION OF THE ASS ESSEE TO THIS EXTENT. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF TH E ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 31.10.2012 SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DT/- 31ST OCTOBER, 2012 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. INDIAN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, ISB CAMPUS, GACH IBOWLI, HYDERABAD 2 . ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME - TAX(EXEMPTION) - I, HYDERABAD 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) IV, HYDERABA D 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX III, HYDERABAD 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD. B.V.S