Nava Bharat Ventures Ltd., Hyderabad V. DCIT, Circle -16(1), Hyderabad

MA 194/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9690 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 08-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIDISHA KALRA
• Assessee Lawyers: V SIVA KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICI AL MEMBER M.A.NO.194/HYD/2012 ( ITA NO.1095/HYD/2009) : ASSTT. YEAR 2006-07 M/S. NAVA BHARAT VENTURES LTD., HYDERABAD ( PAN - AAACN 7327 C) V/S. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 16(1), HYDERABAD (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI V.SIVA KUMAR RESPONDENT BY : SMT. VIDISHA KALRA DR DATE OF HEARING 23.11.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 14.12.2012 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: BY THIS APPLICATION UNDER S.254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX A CT, 1961, THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE HAS PRAYED FOR RECTIFICATION/R ECALL OF THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 20.7.2012, I NSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO ITA NO.1095/HYD/2009 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 2006-07, ON THE GROUND THAT CERTAIN MISTAKES APPARENT FROM RECORD HAVE CREPT INTO THE SAME. 2. IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN IT S CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 20.7.2012, MORE SPECIFICALLY IN THE OPENING PART OF PARA 4, THOUGH DISCUSSED THE FACTS RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06, DULY TAKING NOTE OF THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED AU THORISED REPRESENTATIVE THAT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, TH E TRIBUNAL HELD THAT THE RATE PER UNIT CHARGED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPE CT OF ITS OWN UNIT IS AT THE PREVAILING MARKET RATE AND THE SAME IS IN ACCORD ANCE WITH SUB- SECTION (8) OF S.80IA, AND DIRECTED THAT DEDUCTION UNDE R S.80IA(8) SHOULD BE ALLOWED AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE, IN THE LATER PART OF PARA 4, THE M.A.NO.194/HYD/2012 ( IN ITA NO.1045/ HYD/2009) M/S. NAVA BHARAT VENTURES LTD., HYDERABAD . 2 TRIBUNAL DEALT WITH THE FACTS RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEA R 2005-06 ALONE (ITA NO.61/HYD/09) AND HELD AS FOLLOWS- .THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, H YDERABAD BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE (SUPRA), WE DIRECT THE A.O. TO RECOMPUTE DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA(8) BY TAKING THE RATE OF RS.2.5 3 PER UNIT. HENCE, WE DECIDE THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSE E. THE TRIBUNAL HOWEVER, HAS NOT GIVEN ANY CORRESPONDING FINDING IN RELATION TO GROUND NOS.2(A), 2(B) AND 2(C) RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE, THI S IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD AND THE SAME NEEDS RECTIFICATION. 3. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE CONTRARY, SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, AND HENCE, THE PRESENT APPLICATION OF TH E ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE REJECTED. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ON A CAREFUL READING O F THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT F ROM RECORD, IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, INASMUCH AS, WE FIND THAT THOUG H THE FACTS IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ARE NOTED IN A SOMEW HAT DETAILED MANNER, THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN DONE IN RELATION TO FACT S FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, CONSIDERING SIMILARITY OF FACTS FO R BOTH THE YEARS, AND ULTIMATELY, THE FINDINGS AND THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN ARE COMMON FOR BOTH THE YEARS UNDER APPEAL. IN ANY EVENT, TO REMOVE ANY SCOPE FOR AMBIGUITY, WE CLARIFY THAT THE A.O., IN TERMS OF OUR ORDER DATED 20.7.2012 DISPOSING OFF THE APPEALS INTER-ALIA ITA NOS.61/HYD/2009 AND ITA NOS.1095/HYD/2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND 200 6-07, SHOULD COMPUTE DEDUCTION UNDER S.80IA(8) BY TAKING THE RATE OF RS.2.53 PER UNIT, FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 AND 200 6-07. M.A.NO.194/HYD/2012 ( IN ITA NO.1045/ HYD/2009) M/S. NAVA BHARAT VENTURES LTD., HYDERABAD . 3 5. SUBJECT TO THE ABOVE CLARIFICATION, THE MISCELLANEOU S APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 14.12.2012 SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED/- 14 TH DECEMBER, 2012 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. NAVA BHARAT VENTURES LTD., 25-3-1109/1, RAJBH AVAN ROAD, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD 2. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 16(1), HYDERAB AD 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) V, HYDERABAD 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX IV HYDERABAD 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD. B.V.S