M/s. Veera Exports, Surat V. The ACIT., Circle-6, Surat

MA 233/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8534 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 26-10-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: J P SHAH
• Section: 80HHC

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD , . ! ,'# ' $ BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. MA NO.233/AHD/2010 A.Y.2003-04 [ ./ ( IN I.T.A. NO.1208/AHD/2010 A.Y. 2003-04 ] M/S.VEERA EXPORTS 301, KOHINOOR CHAMBERS JADA KHADI MAHIDHARPURA SURAT (ORIGINAL APPELLANT) ! ! ! ! / VS. THE ASST.CIT CIRCLE-6 SURAT (ORIGINAL RESPONDENT) & '# ./'( ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AACFV 1092 P ( &) / // / APPLICANT ) .. ( *+&)/ RESPONDENT ) &) , '/ APPLICANT BY : SHRI J.P.SHAH *+&) - , ' / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VINOD TANWANI, SR.D.R. !. - /#/ // / DATE OF HEARING : 15.6.2012 0 1 - /# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.7.12 '2/ O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS PETITION EMERGES FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUN AL DATED 19.8.2010 AS REFERRED IN THE NOMENCLATURE HEREINABO VE. THIS PETITION HAS BEEN ARGUED BY LD.AR MR.J.P.SHAH WHO HAS PLACED REL IANCE ON THE CONTENTS OF THE PETITION; RELEVANT PORTION IS REPRO DUCED BELOW:- THE APPELLANT HEREIN HUMBLY DRAWS ATTENTION TO THE UNDER MENTIONED MISTAKE WHICH IS APPARENT ON RECORD IN TH E ORDER OF THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BEING I.T.A. NO.1208/AHD/2010 FOR THE ASST.YEAR 2003-04. IT IS AS FOLLOWS: MA NOS.233/AHD/2010 ( IN ITA NO.1208/AHD /10) M/S.VEERA EXPORTS VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2003-04 - 2 - THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS NO.4 AND 5 FILED BEFORE THE H ON'BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HAVE NOT BEEN DEALT WITH - (4) IN CASE THE ADDITION OF RS.1,06,09,194/- OR A NY PROFIT THEREON COMES TO BE UPHELD, THE ASSESSEE OUGHT TO B E ALLOWED DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80HHC IN RESPECT OF THE SAME. (5) THE CLOSING STOCK VALUATION OUGHT NOT TO HAVE BEEN DISTURBED AND IN CASE IT IS UPHELD, THE OPENING STO CK OUGHT TO BE REVALUED ON THE SAME BASIS AS ADOPTED FOR CLOSIN G STOCK. THE ABOVE MENTIONED ERROR BEING A MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD MAY KINDLY BE RECTIFIED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. 2. LD.AR HAS PLEADED THAT THESE TWO GROUNDS HAVE DU LY BEEN RAISED AS PER THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, HOWEVER DUE TO INADVE RTENCE THESE GROUNDS WERE LEFT WITHOUT ARGUMENT. LD.LAR HAS MADE A STAT EMENT THAT GROUND NO.1 AND CONNECTED GROUND NO.2 BEING MAJOR GROUND H AVE BEEN CONTESTED BUT THESE TWO GROUNDS HAVE LOST THE ATTEN TION OF LD.AR AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THEREFORE AN OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GR ANTED TO CONTEST THESE TWO GROU7NDS. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, FROM THE SIDE OF THE REVENUE LD.SR.DR MR.VINOD TANWANI DRAWN OUR ATTENTION ON THE LAST PA RAGRAPH OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, I.E. PARAGRAPH NO.13 THROUGH WHICH THE TRIBUNAL HAS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED THAT NO OTHER GROUND OR POIN T IS ARGUED OR PRESSED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. LD.DR HA S THEREFORE PLEADED THAT REST OF THE GROUNDS WERE IN FACT NOT PRESSED B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THEREFORE IT IS WRONG ON THE PART OF THE LD.AR TO M AKE A STATEMENT THAT THOSE GROUNDS WERE LEFT WITHOUT ARGUMENT. MA NOS.233/AHD/2010 ( IN ITA NO.1208/AHD /10) M/S.VEERA EXPORTS VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2003-04 - 3 - 4. HAVING HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE DOCTRINE OF NATURAL JUSTIC E PROVIDES TO GIVE A FAIR CHANCE TO A LITIGANT TO RESOLVE AN ISSUE RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. THE UNDISPUTED FACT IS THAT THE GROUND NOS.4 & 5, A S REPRODUCED HEREINABOVE, COULD NOT BE DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL. AS FAR AS THE NON- PRESSING OF THESE TWO GROUNDS AT THE TIME OF HEARIN G AS ALLEGED BY THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT IS CONCERNED, NO ONE CAN AFFIRM THAT FACT WITH CERTAINTY AT PRESENT. NEVERTHELESS, LD.AR MR. J.P. SHAH IS MAKING A STATEMENT AT THE BAR THAT DUE TO INADVERTENCE THESE TWO GROUNDS WERE LEFT FOR ARGUMENT. BE THAT AS IT WAS, OTHERWISE ALSO A FAIR CHANCE HAS TO BE GRANTED TO A LITIGANT TO PLEAD A GROUND VALIDLY RAI SED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE, THEREFORE PARTIALLY RECALL THAT ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL DATED 19/8/2010 FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE TO DECIDE THE LEFT-OVER TWO GROUNDS, I.E. GROUND NOS.4 & 5 AS PER LAW. WE HEREBY DIRECT THE REGISTR Y TO INFORM THE PARTIES BY ISSUING REQUISITE NOTICE OF HEARING. RE SULTANTLY, THE PETITION IS ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.233/ AHD/2010 IS ALLOWED. SD/- SD/- ( . ! ) ( ) '# ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ( MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 27 / 7 / 2012 3/..!, .!../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS MA NOS.233/AHD/2010 ( IN ITA NO.1208/AHD /10) M/S.VEERA EXPORTS VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2003-04 - 4 - '2 - *4 5'41 '2 - *4 5'41 '2 - *4 5'41 '2 - *4 5'41/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. &) / THE APPLICANT 2. *+&) / THE RESPONDENT 3. 6 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 6() / THE CIT(A)-IV, SURAT 5. 49: *! , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. :; <. / GUARD FILE. '2! '2! '2! '2! / BY ORDER, +4 * //TRUE COPY// = == =/ // / ' ' ' ' ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION15.6.12 (DICTATION-PAD PAGES 16 ATTACHED) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 19.6.12/26.7.12 OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S 27.7.12 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 27.7.12 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER