The ITO, Ward 1(2), RAJKOT-GUJARAT V. M/s Balaji Oil Mill, GONDAL

MA 28/RJT/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6482 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 29-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 1995-1996
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: JAY RAJ KUMAR

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT. BEFORE SHRI A. L. GEHLOT (AM )AND SHRI N.R.S. GANE SAN(JM) M.A. NO.28/RJT/10 (ARISING OUT OF ORDER IN ITA NO.177/RJT/01) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96) THE ITO WD..1(2) VS M/S. BALAJI OIL MIL L,. RAJKOT. GONDAL. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI JAY RAJ KUMAR. DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI D. M. RINDANI. O R D E R PER N.R.S.GANESAN (JM). THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 8-3-2005. THE MAIN CONTENTION OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE WAS NOT AUTHORIZED TO S UBMIT THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS NO GRIEVANCE AGAINST THE ORDER OF TH E C.I.T.(A). WHEN IT WAS POINTED OUT TO THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE THAT THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL WAS PASSED ON 08-03-05 AND THE MISCELLANEO US APPLICATION WAS ADMITTEDLY FILED ON 26-03-2010 I.E. BEYOND THE PERI OD OF 4 YEARS, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE APPL ICATION WAS FILED BEYOND THE PERIOD OF 4 YEARS. THE LEARNED D.R. SUBMITTED THAT HE CAN GET THE REASON ONLY FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. WE HAVE HEARD SHRI D. M. RINDANI, THE LEARNED RE PRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO. 3. WE FIND THAT AN APPLICATION U/S.254(2) OF THE I. T. ACT CAN BE FILED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AT ANYTIME WITHIN 4 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER OF 2 THE TRIBUNAL WITH A VIEW TO RECTIFY ANY MISTAKE WHI CH IS APPARENT FROM THE RECORD. AFTER THE PERIOD OF 4 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER, THE TRIBUNAL HAS NO POWER TO ENTERTAIN ANY APPLICATION. MOREOVE R, THE LEGISLATURE HAS NOT PROVIDED ANY PROVISION IN THE INCOME-TAX ACT TO CON DONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPLICATION OF RECTIFICATION U/S.254(2) OF THE I.T. ACT. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SPECIFIC PROVISION, THIS TRIBUNAL HAS NO JURISD ICTION TO CONDONE THE DELAY. IN OTHER WORDS, NO PROCEEDING WOULD BE IN ITIATED TO RECTIFY THE ORDER U/S.252(4) AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE PERIOD OF 4 YEA RS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER. SINCE ADMITTEDLY, THE APPLICATION FOR RECTI FICATION WAS FILED BEYOND THE PERIOD OF 4 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF ORDER, IN OU R OPINION, THE APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. ACCORDINGLY, T HE SAME IS DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13-05-2011. SD/- SD/- (A. L. GEHLOT) (N.R.S.G ANESAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER RAJKOT, DATED: 13-05-2011. NVA/ COPY TO: 1.THE ITO, WD.1(2),RAJKOT. 2.M/S. BALAJI OIL MILL, GONDAL. 3.THE C.I.T.(A)-II, RAJKOT. 4.THE C.I.T.-, RAJKOT. 5.THE D.R.,I.T.A.T.,RAJKOT. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR. ITAT, RAJKOT.