Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Faizabad V. Shri Rakesh Kumar Tiwari, Ambedkar Nagar

MA 22/LKW/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4298 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 13-12-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: HARISH GIDWANI
• Section: 143(2)

Judgement Text

M.A. No.22/Lkw/2021 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘SMC’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No.22/Lkw/2021 (Arising out of I.T.A. No.494/Lkw/2018) Assessment Year:2014-15 A.C.I.T., Circle-Faizabad. Vs. Shri Rakesh Kumar Tiwari, S/o Shri Ram Ganesh Tiwari, 26, Fatehpur, Ariya, Ambedkar Nagar. PAN:AFPPT9984C (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R This Misc. Application has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal dated 24/02/2021 passed in I.T.A. No.494/Lkw/2018. 2. Learned D. R., at the outset, submitted that the Tribunal had allowed additional grounds of appeal of the assessee and had quashed the assessment order by holding that the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued by one Assessing Officer and assessment has been concluded any another Assessing Officer. Learned D. R. in this respect submitted that there exists concurrent jurisdiction with the Assessing Officers under the same range which is as per sub-section 5 of section 120 of the I.T. Act Appellant by Shri P. K. Kapoor, C. A. Respondent by Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date of hearing 13/05/2022 Date of pronouncement 19/05/2022 M.A. No.22/Lkw/2021 2 which empowers the income tax authorities to exercise power and perform all functions as per directions of the CBDT and that for the proper management of the work, wherever considered necessary, the CBDT may require two or more Assessing Officers to exercise and perform concurrently. Learned D. R. submitted that the Assessing Officer has made elaborate Misc. Application for recalling of the order of the Tribunal and in this respect our attention was invited to the copy of Misc. Application and in view of the above it was submitted that the order of the Tribunal be recalled. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that the Department, in its application, is stating that the order passed by the Tribunal is perverse and deserves to be rectified which is not permitted under the provisions of the law. The Tribunal is not empowered to review its decision and is only empowered to rectify any mistake, which is apparent from the record Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that Learned D. R. has not pointed out any mistake in the order of the Tribunal and rather has argued that the order of the Tribunal be revised. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the Tribunal had passed the order by specifically holding that even if there may be concurrent jurisdiction of various Assessing Officers but the Assessing Officer, who had issued notice u/s 143(2), should have completed the assessment which in the present case has not been done and Tribunal had decided the issue after considering various judgments of High Courts including jurisdictional High Court and therefore, in view of these facts and circumstances, it was prayed that since there is no mistake apparent from record, the Misc. Application filed by the Revenue be dismissed. 4. I have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. I find that the Department in its Misc. Application has M.A. No.22/Lkw/2021 3 stated that the order passed by the Tribunal is perverse and deserves to be rectified. The Department, in its application, has explained that it is quite common that when the case is selected under scrutiny, the case falls under one Assessing Officer and on the basis of monetary limits the case has to be transferred to another Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the case as per income returned in subsequent assessment year. Though the Department has filed a detailed application in the form of Misc. Application for recalling of the order of the Tribunal but I do not find anything where the Department had pointed out any mistake apparent from the record. The review of its own order by the Tribunal is not permitted and therefore, the Misc. Application filed by the Revenue stands dismissed. 5. In the result, the Misc. Application of the Revenue is dismissed. (Order pronounced in the open court on 19/05/2022) Sd/. ( T. S. KAPOOR ) Accountant Member Dated:19/05/2022 *Singh Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow Assistant Registrar