DNYANESHWAR TRADING & INVESTMENT P.LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

MA 242/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5690 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJIT PAL SINGH DAIA
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH D, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO.242/M/2019 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.6807/M/2016) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 M/S. DNYANESHWAR TRADING AND INVESTMENT PVT. LTD., 1B, 1 ST FLOOR, COURT CHAMBER, 35, SIR V.T. ROAD, NEW MARINE LINES, MUMBAI 400 020 PAN: AACCD 6513G VS. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1)(1), MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (R ESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI JITENDRA JAIN, A.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI AJIT PAL SINGH DAIA, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 26.04.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.12.2019 O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: BY VIRTUE OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE A SSESSEE HAS PRAYED BEFORE THE BENCH THAT THE ORDER PASSED I N ITA NO.6807/M/2016 FOR A.Y. 2008-09 DATED 14.03.2019 CO NTAINS SOME APPARENT AND PRIMA FACIE MISTAKES WHICH NEED T O BE RECTIFIED. 2. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID ORDER OF TH E TRIBUNAL CONTAINS SOME APPARENT CLERICAL MISTAKES AND ALSO S OME ERROR WHILE GIVING FINDINGS ON THE COMPLIANCE OF REVENUE OF ORDER 5 OF RULE 17 OF CPC. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH THE MA NO.242/M/2019 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.6807/M/2016) M/S. DNYANESHWAR TRADING AND INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. 2 CONCLUSION OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL WILL REMAIN SAME BUT THESE ARE CLERICAL/FACTUAL MISTAKES WHICH NEED TO BE RECTIFIED. 3. THE LD. D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS AS POINTED OUT IN THE MA BY THE LD AR , HOWEVER, THE FINDINGS AS GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL ARE VERY CLEAR AND THEREFORE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION MAY KINDLY BE DIMISSED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE OBSERVE THA T IN ITAT ORDER DATED 14.03.2019 THERE WERE TWO TYPING MISTAK ES IN PARA 8 ON PAGE NO.7 WHICH NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED. IN THE SAID ORDER, FROM LINE NUMBER 6 ONWARDS, IT READS AS UNDER: THE ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 ON 31.03.2015 AFTER TH E APPROVAL OF ADDL. CIT ON 30.3.2015 ARE UNDISPUTED. THE SAID NOTICE WAS SERV ED BY WAY OF AFFIXTURE IS ALSO NOT DISPUTED. 5. NOW WE RECTIFY THE SAID LINES AS UNDER: THE ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 ON 31.03.2015 AFTER TH E APPROVAL OF ADDL. CIT ON 30.3.2015 IS DISPUTED. THE SAID NOTICE WAS SERVED BY WAY OF AFFIXTURE IS ALSO DISPUTED. 6. SIMILARLY, ON PAGE NO.17, IN LAST PARA WE HAVE H ELD THAT THE SERVICE OF NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 DATED 31 .3.2015 THROUGH AFFIXTURE ON 31.3.2015 IS NOT A VALID SERVI CE AND THUS OMITTED TO STATE THAT THE PROCEDURE UNDER ORDER 5 R ULE 17 OF CPC HAS NOT BEEN FOLLOWED. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAID PARA IS MODIFIED AND MAY BE READ AS UNDER: THE SERVICE OF NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 DATED 31.3.20 15 THROUGH AFFIXTURE ON 31.3.2015 IS NOT A VALID SERVICE AS PROCEDURE AS PE R ORDER 5 RULE 17 OF CPC HAS NOT BEEN FOLLOWED AND ACCORDINGLY THE RE-ASSESSMENT PRO CEEDINGS AND CONSEQUENT ORDER ARE QUASHED. MA NO.242/M/2019 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.6807/M/2016) M/S. DNYANESHWAR TRADING AND INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. 3 7. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED AND THE ORDER OF ITAT DATED 14.3.2019 ST ANDS MODIFIED TO THE EXTENT STATED HEREINABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19.12.2019. SD/- SD/- ( RAM LAL NEGI) (RAJESH KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 19.12.2019. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORDER DY/ASS TT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.