IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) MA No. 19/Ind/2016 (Arising out of ITA No. 496/Ind/2013) Assessment-Year: 2009-10 ACIT 1(1) Bhopal Vs. M/s. Bhawani Housing & Investment Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal (Appellant/Revenue) (Respondent/Assessee) PAN: AABCB5382N Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Assessee by Shri Ashish Goyal, AR Date of Hearing 09.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 12.09.2022 O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: 1. This Misc. Application u/s 254(2) of Income-tax Act, 1961 is preferred by revenue seeking rectification of the Order dated 03.08.2015 of ITAT, Indore Bench, in ITA No. 496/Ind/2013 for A.Y. 2009-10 by which the appeal of revenue was dismissed. 2. Ld. DR submits that in the aforesaid Order dated 03.08.2015, the ITAT has upheld the order of Ld. CIT(A) and thereby allowed deduction u/s 80-IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 although the assessee had obtained completion-certificate of the project after 4 years from end of the financial M/s. Bhawani Housing & Investment P. Ltd. MANo.19/Ind/2016 Assessment year 2009-10 Page 2 of 3 year in which the project was approved by local authority, which is not in consonance with the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur Bench in the case of CIT, Bhopal Vs. M/s Global Reality in ITA No. 35, 36 and 40/2012 dated 21.08.2015 and hence the order of ITAT is suffering from an apparent mistake, being against the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. Therefore, the Order suffers from a mistake rectifiable u/s 254(2). Ld. DR prayed for rectification. 3. However, on being pointed by the Bench that the ITAT had passed order on 03.08.2015 and the Judgement of Hon’ble High Court came on 21.08.2015, Ld. DR instantly and fairly understood and agreed that there is no mistake in the Order of ITAT which was passed when the judgement of Hon’ble High Court had not come into being. 4. Ld. AR appearing on behalf of assessee gainfully referred to the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Sugar Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. Vs. CIT Misc. Civil Case No. 237 of 1994 dated 29.11.1989, where the head-note states: “Whether in view of fact that High Court’s judgement was passed after Tribunal had allowed assessee’s claim and also because said judgement was pending before Supreme Court to be tested, it could not be said that said point was not debatable, and hence, Tribunal was wrong in rectifying mistake under section 254(2) – Held, yes.” M/s. Bhawani Housing & Investment P. Ltd. MANo.19/Ind/2016 Assessment year 2009-10 Page 3 of 3 5. In view of above and for the reasons stated above, we do not find any mistake in the order dated 03.08.2015 of ITAT, Indore Bench. Therefore, we find this Misc. Application devoid of any merit. 6. In the result, this Misc. Application is dismissed. Order pronounced as per Rule 34 of I.T.A.T. Rules 1963 on 12.09. 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore Dated: 12.09.2022 Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Sr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore 1. Date of taking dictation 09.09.2022 2. Date of typing & draft order placed before the Dictating Member 09.09.2022 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 09.09.2022 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 09.09.2022 5. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 6. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 7. Date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 8. Date of dispatch of the Order