ACIT, CHENNAI V. Shri Manish Raichand Mardia, CHENNAI

MA 209/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1428 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-01-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 20-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S DASGUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO.209/MDS/2013 (IN ITA NO.295/MDS/2012) (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 8-09) THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE XI, CHENNAI-600 006. VS. SHRI. MANISH RAICHAND MARDIA, NO.263, MINT STREET, CHENNAI 600 003. (PAN NO.AAIPM6289M) (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : MR. S. DAS GUPTA, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : MR. S . SRIDHAR, ADV. DATE OF HEARING : 31 ST JANUARY, 2014. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 ST JANUARY, 2014. O R D E R PER DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED BY THE REVENU E PRAYING THE TRIBUNAL TO RECONSIDER ITS ORDER PASSED ON 22 ND MAY, 2012 IN ITA NO.295(MDS)/2012. 02. THE SAID APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 2009. THE ISSUE ADJUDICATED IN THE SAID APPEAL WAS AGAINST ADDITION OF A6,69,94,111/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUND THAT CERTAIN -2- M.P. NO.209/MDS/2013 (IN ITA NO.295/MDS/2012) PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT PROVED. AF TER CONSIDERING THE CASE IN APPEAL, THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT THE ADDITION WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. ACCORDINGLY, THE TRIBUNAL DELETED THE SAID ADDITION AND ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 03. NOW, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE PETITIONER IN THE PRESENT MATTER, CONTENDS THAT THE TRIBUNAL MAY DIRE CT THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT BY ESTIMATING THE GROSS PROFIT ON THE PURCHASES COVERED BY THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING AUTHO RITY. 04. IT IS THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER THAT IN ANOTHE R CASE M/S. FAHAD INTERNATIONAL, THE TRIBUNAL HAS ADOPTED THE SAID CO URSE OF ACTION AND THE SAME VIEW MAY BE TAKEN IN THE PRESENT CASE AS WELL. 05. ON GOING THROUGH THIS PETITION, WE FIND THAT TH ERE IS NO REFERENCE OF ANY MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. T HE PETITIONER IS PRAYING FOR RESORTING AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN OTHER WORDS, THE PETITION ER WANTED THE TRIBUNAL TO CHANGE ITS EARLIER ORDER AND INSTEAD OF DELETING TH E ADDITION, DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ESTIMATE GROSS PROFIT ON THE A MOUNT OF ADDITION. -3- M.P. NO.209/MDS/2013 (IN ITA NO.295/MDS/2012) 06. THE COURSE OF ACTION SOUGHT FOR BY THE PETITION ER MAY BE JUSTIFIED IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THAT PARTICULAR CASE REF ERRED TO BY HIM IN THE PETITION. THE SAID ORDER IS IN PERSONAM AND IT CANNOT BE APPLIED FOR ALL SITUATIONS. 07. WE FIND THAT THE PETITION FILED BEFORE US IS IN THE NATURE OF A REVIEW PETITION FOR WHICH THIS COURT HAS NO JURISDICTION. THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON FRIDAY, THE 31 ST OF JANUARY, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) ( DR. O.K.NAR AYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI. DATED THE 31 ST JANUARY, 2014. KV COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR/GF