Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela V. ACIT, Rorukela Circle, Rourkela

MA 2/CTK/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4006 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 119(2)(b)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pramod Kumar Moharana, President of NALCO Mines Employees Union, Koraput PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Assessee by Per Bench This is a order of the assessment years 2012 2. The facts in the present case show that there was an order passed u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act, by Pr. CIT, Bhubaneswar assessee for the assessment years 2012 approached the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Orissa against the said IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.No.01/CTK/2021 (in ITA No.26/CTK/2021) Assessment Year : 2012-13 to 1017 Pramod Kumar Moharana, President of NALCO Mines Employees Union, Koraput. Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Bhubaneswar No.ACCPP 6164 E (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri B.Panda, Sr. Adv/Shri Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty Date of Hearing : 10/6/ 20 Date of Pronouncement : 10/ O R D E R This is a miscellaneous application filed by the assessee against the der of the ITAT dated 23.12.2021 in ITA No.26/CTK/ assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18. The facts in the present case show that there was an order passed u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act, by Pr. CIT, Bhubaneswar- assessee for the assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18. The assessee had approached the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Orissa against the said Page1 | 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ) 13 to 1017-18 1, Bhubaneswar Respondent) /Shri B.R.Panda, Adv S.C.Mohanty (DR) / 2022 /6/2022 filed by the assessee against the .26/CTK/2021 for the The facts in the present case show that there was an order passed -1 in the case of the 18. The assessee had approached the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Orissa against the said M.A.No.01/CTK/2021 (in ITA No.26/CTK/2021) Assessment Year : 2012-13 to 1017-18 Page2 | 4 order and the Hon’ble High Court had disposed off of the writ petition in W.P.(C) No.24445/2020 dated 5.1.2021 and I.A. No.250/2021 vide order dated 17.3.2021. In the said order, the Hon’ble High Court had directed the ITAT to condone the delay, if any, and dispose off the appeal of the assessee on merits. The Tribunal had in its order in para 17 held that the appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act dated 15.7.2020 was not maintainable before the Tribunal. It was the submission that this finding of the Tribunal was erroneous insofar as the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa had directed the Tribunal to dispose off the appeal after condoning the delay, if any. It was the submission that the Hon’ble High Court having given such direction, it was incumbent upon the Tribunal to dispose off the appeal though the appeal was against the order u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act. It was the submission that the findings in the order of the Tribunal dated 23.12.2021 constitutes a mistake, which requires rectification. 3. In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that the order u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act passed by the Pr. CIT was not an appealable order before the Tribunal. It was the submission that there is no error in the order of the Tribunal, which calls for rectification. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of Hon’ble High Court of Orissa in Para 3 in I.A. No.250/20231 dated 17.3.2021 extracted below shows that the words used “It is clarified that M.A.No.01/CTK/2021 (in ITA No.26/CTK/2021) Assessment Year : 2012-13 to 1017-18 Page3 | 4 the petitioners are permitted to file an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and any explanation offered by them for the delay in filing the appeal on account of pendency of the present petition will be considered by the ITAT in accordance with law.” The ITAT while disposing off the assessee’s appeal had condoned the delay after considering the merits of the contentions raised. Further, in due compliance to the order of the Hon’ble High Court, the appeal filed by the assessee had been disposed of by a speaking order, wherein, it has been clarified that the order u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act is not an appealable order before the Tribunal. This being so, as no specific error has been pointed out by ld A.R., the Miscellaneous petition stands dismissed. 5. In the result, M.A. filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 10 /6/2022. Sd/- sd/- (Arun Khodpia) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 10 /06/2022 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) M.A.No.01/CTK/2021 (in ITA No.26/CTK/2021) Assessment Year : 2012-13 to 1017-18 Page4 | 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Pramod Kumar Moharana, President of NALCO Mines Employees Union, Koraput 2. The Respondent. Pr. CIT-1, Bhubaneswar 3. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 4. Guard file. //True Copy//