DCIT 6(2), MUMBAI V. CNCS FACILITY SOLUTIONS P.LTD, MUMBAI

MA 23/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6235 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N HEMLATHA
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NOS. 23 & 24/MUM/2017 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS. 3720 & 3721/MUM/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2008-09 & 2009-10) DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(2) MUMBAI VS. M/S. CNCS FACILITY SOLUTIONS P. LTD. 317, HANUMAN INDUSTRAIL ESTATE KARTAK ROAD, WADALA (W) MUMBAI 400031 PAN AACCC9452H APPLICANT RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY: MS. N. HEMLATHA RESPONDENT BY: S/SHRI VIJAY MEHTA & ANUJ KISNADWALA DATE OF HEARING: 02.02.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14.02.2018 O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, AM THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS. 3720 & 3721/MUM/2013 IN WHICH THE REVENUE HAS PRAYED THAT SOME GROUNDS WERE NOT ADJUDICATED WHILE DECIDING THE APPEALS IN ITA NOS. 3720 & 3721/MUM/2013. 2. THE LEARNED D.R. SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BENCH THAT WH ILE ADJUDICATING THE ITA NO. 3720/MUM/2013 GROUND NOS. 1,2,5,7,8 & 9 AND IN ITA NO. 3721/MUM/2013 1,5 & 7 WERE NOT ADJUDICATED AT ALL A ND THEREFORE THE SAME CONSTITUTE AN APPARENT MISTAKE ON THE FACE OF THE ORDER AND IN VIEW OF THE SAME THE ORDER SHOULD BE RECALLED SO THAT AL L THE GROUNDS COULD BE ADJUDICATED. 3. THE LEARNED A.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED BEF ORE THE BENCH THAT THERE WAS ONLY COMMON ISSUE IN ALL THE GROUNDS WHICH HAVE BEEN ADJUDICATED AND THE GROUNDS ARE ONLY ARGUMENTATIVE AND NO REAL ISSUES MA NOS. 23 &24/MUM/2017 M/S. CNCS FACILITY SOLUTIONS P. LTD. 2 WERE RAISED BY THE REVENUE. THE LEARNED A.R. SUBMIT TED THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS NOT AT ALL RELEVANT AS THE TRIBUNAL WO ULD DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MAIN ISSUE INVOLVED IN BOTH THE APPEALS BY THE REVE NUE. THE LEARNED A.R. ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO ADDITIONAL EVIDENC E ADMITTED BY THE CIT(A). WHATEVER HAVE BEEN FURNISHED BEFORE THE CIT (A) WAS ONLY PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTION FROM THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND I N VIEW OF THE FACTS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY REVENUE BE DISM ISSED. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE MA TERIAL ON RECORD WE FIND THAT THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE WERE ARGUMENTATIVE IN NATURE AND THE MAIN ISSUE IN ALL THE GROUNDS WERE D ECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE MAIN ISSUES INVOLVED WAS DECI DED AND WHATEVER EVIDENCES WERE PLACED BEFORE THE CIT(A) WERE ONLY O N THE DIRECTION OF THE CIT(A) AND NOT BY WAY OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. THER EFORE, KEEPING IN VIEW THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE VIEW TH AT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT ARE NOT MAINTA INABLE AND ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED AS THERE IS NO APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE OR DER. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH FEBRUARY, 2018. SD/ - SD/ - (D.T. GARASIA) (RAJESH KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 14 TH FEBRUARY, 2018 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) -6, MUMBAI 4. THE CIT - CONCERNED 5. THE DR, C BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.