The Agriculture Peoduce Market Committee, V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-3, Nadiad

MA 27/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7104 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 15-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K PATEL
• Assessee Lawyers: S P BHAT

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI D. K. TYAGI, JM AND SHRI A. K. GARODIA , AM) M. A. NO.27/AHD/2010 (IN ITA NO.1154/AHD/2008- AY: 2004-05) THE AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, MARKET YARD, MATAR, DISTRICT KARIA VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -3, NADIAD PA NO. AAALT 0154 E (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI S. P. BHAT, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI A. K. PATEL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 25-11-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25-11-2011 ORDER PER D. K. TYAGI : THROUGH THIS MISC. APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE WANTS US TO RECALL OUR ORDER DATED 17-10-2 008 ON THE GROUND THAT WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT ADJUDICATED GROUND NO.2 TAKEN BY T HE ASSESSEE IN ITS MEMO OF APPEAL. 2. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE RECORD, WE FIND THAT FOLLOWING GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS MEMO OF APPEAL HAS NOT BEEN ADJUDICATED BY THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL WH ILE DECIDING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 17-10-2 008: (2) ON PAGE 2 PARA 4 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER IN THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER THE LD. C. I. T. HAS -- CONFIRM ED THE ISSUE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) ON THE BASIS OF LD. I.T.OS LETTER DT. 12-12-2007. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN REJECTED ACCORDINGLY AND ALSO FINDING REFERENCE IN THE SUBMI SSION MADE BY THE APPELLANT ON 27-8-06 AND THE STATEMENT OF MA NO.27/AHD/2010 (IN ITA NO. 1154/AHD//2008) THE AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE VS ITO, W- 3, NADIAD 2 FACTS FILED ALONG WITH THE APPEAL. THE CONCLUSION I S NOT CORRECT FOR THE REASON THAT NO SUCH NOTICE AS REFER RED TO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER (PARA-2) HAS BEEN EITHER ISS UED OR RECEIVED. ON THIS ISSUE THE PETITIONER HAS FAILE D AN AFFIDAVIT. THE RECORD IN THIS REGARD SHALL BE SPEAK ING. 3. THUS, A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD HAS CREPT I N THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL DATED 17-10-2008. THEREFORE, T HE SAME IS RECALLED FOR LIMITED PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATING THE AB OVE GROUND. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO RE-FIX THE APPEAL FOR HEARI NG IN NORMAL COURSE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSE SSEE IS ALLOWED FOR LIMITED PURPOSE AS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A. K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (D. K. TYAGI) JUDICIAL MEMBER LAKSHMIKANT/- 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 D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD