Shri Narendra Kumar Agrawal, Burhanpur V. The DCIT, Khandwa

MA 19/IND/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3000 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 12-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: S N AGRAWAL

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 19/IND/2014 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 74/IND/2009 A.Y. 2005-06 SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL BURHANPUR PAN ADAPA 01131B ::: APPLICANT VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KHANDWA ::: RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI S.N. AGRAWAL AND SHRI PANKAJ MOGRA RESPONDENT BY SHRI R.A. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 8.5. 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 5 . 5 .2015 O R D E R PER SHRI B.C. MEENA, AM THIS IS AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER DATED 25 TH OCTOBER, 2012. 2 2. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT GROUND NOS. 7, 8 AND 9 IN RESPECT OF T HE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE A.Y. 2005-06 HAVE NOT BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND HE PLEADED THAT TO THAT EXTENT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL MAY BE RECALLED. 3. THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION T O RECALL WITH REGARD TO GROUND NOS. 7, AND 9 WHICH HAVE N OT BEEN TO BE ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBUNAL. HOWEVER, HE SUBMITTED THAT GROUND NO. 8 IN RESPECT OF CREDIT/SET OFF OF INCOME TAXED IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS FOLLOWING THE PRI NCIPLE OF TELESCOPING HAS ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE TRIB UNAL. HE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO VARIOUS PARAS OF THE ORDER WHI CH DEALT WITH THIS ISSUE. HE SUBMITS THAT IF THE SAME IS RECALLED, IT WOULD AMOUNT TO REVIEW OF THE ORDER OF T HE TRIBUNAL AND THE TRIBUNAL HAS NO POWER 3 TO REVIEW ITS ORDER. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE FOLLO WING CASE LAWS :- (1) ACIT VS. SAURASHTRA KUTCH STOCK EXCHANGE LTD. 305 ITR 227 (SC) (2) CIT VS. CHHABRA GINNING UDHYOG; 303 ITR 182 (MP) (3) AGARWAL WAREHOUSING & LEASING LTD. VS. CIT; 257 ITR 235 (MP) 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE PARTIES. WE FIND THAT GROUND NOS. 7 AND 9 HAVE NOT BEEN ADJUDICATED BY T HE TRIBUNAL, THEREFORE, WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBU NAL TO THAT EXTENT. HOWEVER, WITH REGARD TO GROUND NO. 8 RE LATING TO SET OFF OF INCOME TAXED IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS, W E AGREE WITH THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED DR THAT THIS ISSU E HAS ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED AND CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL AN D ANY INTERFERENCE SHALL LEAD TO REVIEW OF THE ORDER OF THE 4 TRIBUNAL. IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUP REME COURT IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. SAURASHTRA KUTCH STOCK EXCHANGE LIMITED (SUPRA), WE FIND NO MERIT IN THIS PLEADING. HENCE, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS NOT ALLOWED TO THAT EXTENT. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS PAR TLY ALLOWED AS INDICATED ABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 15 TH MAY, 2015 SD/- SD/- (D.T. GARASIA) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MAY 15 , 2015