, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI ... , . !'# ! , $ !% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER && / M.P. NO.185/CHNY/2018 (IN I.T.A. NO.53/CHNY/2018) ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 M/S TVS COMMUTATION SOLUTIONS LTD. AMALGAMATED WITH TVS LOGISTICS SERVICES LIMITED, NO.58, ELDAMS ROAD, TEYNAMPET, CHENNAI - 600 018. PAN : AADCT 0196 N V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI - 600 034. (*+' /PETITIONER) (*,+-/ RESPONDENT) *+' / 0 /PETITIONER BY : SHRI M. VISWANATHAN, CA *,+- / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT 1 / 2$ / DATE OF HEARING : 02.11.2018 3'( / 2$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.11.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 12.07.2018. 2. SHRI M. VISWANATHAN, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DEBITED A SUM OF 28,11,240/- TOWARDS 2 M.P. NO.185/CHNY/18 VEHICLE HIRE CHARGES DURING THE PERIOD APRIL TO DEC EMBER, 2011AND THE TDS WAS DEDUCTED AND PAID TO THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT . THERE WAS A REVERSAL OF ENTRY TO TDS WAS ALSO MADE DURING THE Y EAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REP RESENTATIVE, IT HAS TO BE ALLOWED AS DEDUCTION WHILE COMPUTING TOTAL INCOME. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS PE TITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DEFECTIVE IN NATURE. IN THE CAUSE TITL E, THE ASSESSEE REFERRED THE DEPARTMENT AS APPELLANT AND THE ASSESSEE AS RES PONDENT. IN BOTH THE APPEAL AS WELL AS THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, T HE ASSESSEE IS THE APPELLANT AND PETITIONER. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THIS REFERENCE IN THE CAUSE TITLE IS TOTALLY WRONG. MOR EOVER, AT PAGE 3, PARA 5 OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER, THIS TRIBUNAL FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS FOLLOWING MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING. ADMITTEDLY, ACCOR DING TO THE LD. D.R., TDS WAS EFFECTED, THEREFORE, IT HAS TO BE CLAIMED D URING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 AND NOT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-1 4. IN VIEW OF SPECIFIC FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL, ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THERE IS NO ERROR MUCH LESS PRIMA FACIE ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WITH REFERENCE TO CAUSE TITLE OF THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, THE MIST AKE POINTED OUT BY THE LD. D.R. IS CORRECT. THE ASSESSEE HAS WRONGLY STAT ED THE DEPARTMENT AS 3 M.P. NO.185/CHNY/18 APPELLANT / PETITIONER. APART FROM THAT, EVEN ON M ERIT, THE TDS WAS EFFECTED, THEREFORE, THE SAID SUM HAS TO BE CLAIMED ONLY DURING THE YEAR 2012-13 AND NOT FOR 2013-14. IN VIEW OF THE CATEGO RICAL FINDING OF THIS TRIBUNAL, THERE IS NO ERROR MUCH LESS PRIMA FACIE ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 12.07.2018 WHICH REQUIRES RECTIFICAT ION UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS NO MERIT IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE MISCELLANEOUS PE TITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSI ON OF HEARING ON 2 ND NOVEMBER, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !'# ! ) ( ... ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 2 ND NOVEMBER, 2018. KRI. / *26& 7&(2 /COPY TO: 1. *+' / PETITIONER 2. *,+- /RESPONDENT 3. 1 82 () /CIT(A) 4. 1 82 /CIT 5. &9 *2 /DR 6. :' ; /GF.