Smt. Hemalatha Chandran, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

MA 200/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4717 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVA SRINIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: A S SRIRAMAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . , ! ' BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.P.NO.200/MDS/2016 [IN I.T.A.NO.603/MDS/2015] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 (PETITIONER) ( /RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI A.S.SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHIVA SRINIVAS, JCIT # $%! /DATE OF HEARING : 30.09.2016 &' $%! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.09.2016 /O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETI TION ON THE GROUND THAT GROUNDS NO. 8 AND 10 WAS NOT DISPOSED O FF. SMT.HEMALATHA CHANDRAN, C/O. SHRI S.SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE, NEW NO.14, OLD NO.82, FLAT NO.5, 1 ST AVENUE, INDIRA NAGAR, ADYAR, CHENNAI 600 020. PAN: AACPC 2079 H V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD III(3), CHENNAI 600 034. 2 M.A. NO.200/MDS/2016 2. SHRI A.S.SRIRAMAN, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SPECIFICALLY RAISED GROUND NO . 8 WITH REGARD TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS.4,42,885/- UNDER THE HEAD INCOM E FROM BUSINESS. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RAISED GROUND NO.10 WITH REGA RD TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS.7,00,000/- UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM BUSINE SS. THESE GROUNDS WERE NOT DISPOSED OFF BY THIS TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOS ING OFF THE APPEAL. ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE, N ON DISPOSAL OF THE SPECIFIC GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AN ERROR WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. 3. WE HEARD SHRI SHIVA SRINIVAS, THE LEARNED DEPART MENT REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENT REPRESE NTATIVE VERY FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THE GROUNDS NO.8 AND 10 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT DISPOSED OFF BY THIS TRIBUNAL AND THEREFORE, TO THA T EXTENT, THERE IS A ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EIT HER SIDE AND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS RIGHTL Y SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE LEARNED DE PARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED GROUNDS NO. 8 AND 10 WITH REGARD TO RS.4,42,885/- AND RS.7,00,000/- RESPECTIVELY UND ER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THESE TWO GROUNDS RAISED BY TH E ASSESSEE WAS NOT 3 M.A. NO.200/MDS/2016 DISPOSED OFF BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ORDER DATED 01 .04.2016. THEREFORE, TO THAT EXTENT, THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL WHICH NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE IN ITA NO.603 /MDS/2016 IS RE-OPENED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISP OSING GROUNDS NO.8 AND 10 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE REGISTRY IS DIRE CTED TO POST THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.603/MDS/2016 FOR DISPOSAL OF GROUNDS NO.8 & 10 ON 27.10.2016. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING IS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH PARTIES, NOTICE OF HEARING NEE D NOT BE ISSUED TO EITHER PARTY FOR HEARING ON 27.10.2016. IN OTHER WO RDS, COPY OF THIS ORDER SHALL BE TREATED AS NOTICE FOR HEARING. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ! /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, ( /DATED, THE 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2016. SP. 4 M.A. NO.200/MDS/2016 $ )%*+ ,+'% /COPY TO: 1. APPLICANT 2. )-./ /RESPONDENT 3. # 0% ( )/CIT(A) 4. # 0% /CIT 5. +1 )% /DR 6. 23 4 /GF.