S.Saravanan, Pondicherry V. ACIT, Pondicherry

MA 201/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7035 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 06-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR

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.201/CHNY/2017 (IN I.T.A. NO.51/MDS/2015) & '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI S. SARAVANAN, NO.2, MARIAMMAN KOIL STREET, KADIRKAMAM, PONDICHERRY-605 009. PAN : APGPS 7103 B V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, PONDICHERRY. ()*& /PETITIONER) ()+*,/ RESPONDENT) )*& . / /PETITIONER BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE )+*, . / / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT 0 . 1# / DATE OF HEARING : 24.08.2018 2!' . 1# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.08.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ORDER O F THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 23.03.2017. 2. SHRI S. SRIDHAR, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT AN AMOUNT OF 36 LAKHS WAS 2 M.P. NO.201/CHNY/17 RECEIVED FROM ONE SHRI L. JAYAPAL BY WAY OF THREE C HEQUES. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RECEIVED 4 LAKHS FROM ONE SHRI G. KALIVARADHAN. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE FI RST APPELLATE AUTHORITY RESTRICTED THE ADDITION WITH REGARD TO CA SH DEPOSIT TO THE EXTENT OF 9 LAKHS AND DELETED THE BALANCE AMOUNT. AS REGARDS DEPOSIT OF 40 LAKHS, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF APPEAL BEF ORE THIS TRIBUNAL, THE ISSUE WAS REMITTED BACK TO THE F ILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO THE LD. C OUNSEL, AT PAGE 4 OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL, IT WAS REFERRED AS IF THE SAME WAS RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEES FATHER. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE SUM OF 36 LAKHS WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM SHRI L. JAYAPAL AND NOT FROM HIS FATHER. THEREFORE, ACCORD ING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE REFERENCE ABOUT THE ASSESSEES FATHER IS AN ERROR WHICH NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED. 3. WE HEARD SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. AT PAGE 4 OF THE ORDER OF T HIS TRIBUNAL, AT LINE 6 FROM TOP, IT WAS REFERRED AS IF THE ASSESSEE CLAI MS THAT 36 LAKHS WAS RECEIVED FROM HIS FATHER. BUT, THE FACT IS THA T THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED THE SAID AMOUNT FROM ONE SHRI L. JAYAPAL. THEREFORE, THE REFERENCE ABOUT THE ASSESSEES FATHER IS A MISTAKE, WHICH IS 3 M.P. NO.201/CHNY/17 APPARENT ON THE FACE OF RECORD WHICH NEEDS TO BE RE CTIFIED. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IS RECTIFIE D AS FOLLOWS: AT PAGE 4, LINE 6 FROM TOP, THE WORD HIS FATHER I S DELETED. INSTEAD SHRI JAYAPAL IS INSERTED. AFTER RECTIFICATION, LINE 6 FROM TOP AT PAGE 4 OF THE ORDER SHALL BE READ AS FOLLOWS:- THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT 36 LAKHS WAS RECEIVED FROM SHRI JAYAPAL. 4. THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 23.03.2017 IS RE CTIFIED ACCORDINGLY. THE OTHER PART OF THE ORDER SHALL RE MAIN AS SUCH. 5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE MISCELLANEOUS PE TITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSI ON OF HEARING ON 24TH AUGUST, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !' ) ( ... ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 24 TH AUGUST, 2018. 4 M.P. NO.201/CHNY/17 KRI. . )15% 6%'1 /COPY TO: 1. )*& / PETITIONER 2. )+*, /RESPONDENT 3. 0 71 () /CIT(A) 4. 0 71 /CIT 5. %8 )1 /DR 6. 9& : /GF.