M/s. Krishna Corporation, Mumbai V. The ACIT., Circle-1, Bhavnagar

MA 236/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0106 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 12-04-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI D. K. TYAGI, JM AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALAN KAMONY, AM) MA NO.236/AHD/2012 IN M. A. NO.87/AHD/2012 [IN IT (SS) A NO.41/AHD/2007 FOR B. P. 1.4.1990 TO 7.1.2000) M/S. KRISHNA CORPORATION(SINCE DISSOLVED, THROUGH ITS ERSTWHILE PARTNER SHRI VINOD S. BUSHA), B/G-5, NAGESHWAR BUILDING, PADMAVATI NAGAR, 150 FT. ROAD, BHAYADER (WEST), DIST. THANA 400 101 P. A. NO. AACFK 2773 Q VS THE A. C. I. T., INV. CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR (APPLICANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI A. J. PAREKH, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI Y. P. SHARMA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 05-04-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12-04-2013 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY : THIS MISC. APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATE D 28-09-2012 FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD 01-04-1990 TO 07-01-2000. THE ASSE SSEE HAS MADE AN ELABORATE AND DESCRIPTIVE SUBMISSION WITH RESPEC T TO THE MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WHICH CAN BE LISTED AS UNDER: (I) GROUND NO.1 TO 8 OF THE APPEAL RAISED BY THE AS SESSEE WAS CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL TO BE TECHNICAL ISSU E WHILE AS THE SAME WAS SUBSTANTIAL LEGAL ISSUE. MA NO.236/AHD/2012 IN MA NO.87/AHD/2012 (BP- 1.4. 1990 TO 7.1.2000) (IN IT (SS) A NO.41/AHD/2007) KRISHNA CORPORATION VS ACIT, INV. CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGA R 2 (II) THE TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE WITHOUT VER IFYING THE SATISFACTION NOTE. (III) THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDERED INADMISSIBLE EVID ENCE. (IV) THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT TAKEN NOTE OF THE JUDICIA L PRONOUNCEMENTS CITED. (V) THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT CONSIDERED GROUNDS NO.9 AN D 10 OF THE APPEAL WITH RESPECT TO MERITS. 2. THE LEARNED AR REITERATED THE ABOVE MENTIONED SU BMISSIONS BEFORE US AND PRAYED THAT SINCE THE ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL IS ERRONEOUS IT MAY BE RECALLED FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. 3. THE LEARNED DR ON THE OTHER HAND, PRAYED THAT TH ERE WAS NO MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED AR AND SINC E THE TRIBUNAL IS NOT EMPOWERED TO REVIEW ITS ORDER MAY DISMISS THE M ISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. AT THE OUTSET, WE MUST MENTION THAT THE ORDER PA SSED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 28-09-2012 WAS ON THE LIMITED ISSUE OF JURISDICTION OF THE AO U/S 158BD OF THE ACT BECAUSE THIS CASE WAS RECAL LED EARLIER IN MA NO.87/AHD/2012 VIDE ORDER DATED 06-07-2012 TO DE CIDE THE ISSUE FOR SUCH LIMITED PURPOSE. FURTHER, AT THE TIME OF H EARING THE MAIN ISSUE RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS THAT THE SATIS FACTION NOTE RECORDED BY THE RELEVANT ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ISSU ANCE OF NOTICE U/S 158 BD OF THE ACT WAS NOT IN THE FILE OF THE REVENU E. AFTER ELABORATE ARGUMENTS, THE BENCH HAD DECIDED THE MATTER BY DELI VERING A SPEAKING ORDER AFTER CONSIDERING THE CASE LAWS CITE D BY THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE THE BENCH. HOWEVER, T HE LEARNED AR HAD POINTED BEFORE US THAT THERE WAS OTHER RELEVANT FACTUAL AND LEGAL ISSUES DISCUSSED IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION PLACED B EFORE THE BENCH MA NO.236/AHD/2012 IN MA NO.87/AHD/2012 (BP- 1.4. 1990 TO 7.1.2000) (IN IT (SS) A NO.41/AHD/2007) KRISHNA CORPORATION VS ACIT, INV. CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGA R 3 AND THE SAME WERE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE BENCH IN IT S ORDER. ON PERUSING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION WE FIND THE SUBMISS ION OF THE LEARNED AR HAS MERIT. SINCE CERTAIN FACTUAL AND LEGAL ASPEC TS DISCUSSED IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WERE NOT ARGUED BEFORE THE BENC H AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE SAME WAS NOT TAKEN NOTE OFF BY THE BENC H WHILE WRITING THE ORDER. THEREFORE IT APPEARS THAT A MISTAKE HAS OCCURRED IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND TO RECTIFY THE SAME WE HE REBY RECALL OUR ORDER WITH RESPECT TO THE LIMITED ISSUE TO BE ADJUD ICATED BY VIRTUE OF THE ORDER IN MA NO.87/AHD/2012 DATED 06-07-2012. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12-04-2013. SD/- SD/- (D. K. TYAGI) JUDICIAL MEMBER (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER LAKSHMIKANT LAKSHMIKANT LAKSHMIKANT LAKSHMIKANTA AA A DEKA/ DEKA/ DEKA/ DEKA/- -- - COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: DIRECT ON COMPUTER 08-04-2 013/09-04-2013 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 09-04-2013 OTHER MEMBER: 3. DATE ON WHICH APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S./P.S.: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S./P.S.: 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK: 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: