GANPATRAJ NEMAL JAIN, MUMBAI V. ITO 19 (1)(3), MUMBAI

MA 281/MUM/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8678 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-11-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY J SETHI
• Keywords: Rectification of order; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (ACCOUNTANTMEMBER) MA NO. 281/MUM/2020 (ITA NO. 5377/MUM/2018) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 MR. GANPATRAJ NAINMAL JAIN, 10/1, BHANDARI STREET, 1 ST KUBHARWADA, MUMBAI-400 004. VS. THE ITO-19(1)(3), MATRU MANDIR, TARDEO, MUMBAI-400 007. PAN NO. AFNPJ 0762 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MR. SANJAY J. SETHI, DR DATE OF HEARING : 23/07/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23/07/2021 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A.M. BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION (MA), THE ASSESSEE SEEKS RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE U/S 254(2) OF THE INCOME T AX ACT, 1961 IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 5377/MUM/2018 FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 2009-10 VIDE ORDER DATED 13.11.2019. 2. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RECORD. NONE HAS APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE PAST SEVERAL OCCASIONS DESPITE DUE NOTICE. I FIND THAT BY WAY OF THIS MA, THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS AS UNDER : MR. GANPATRAJ N. JAIN MA NO. 281/MUM/2020 2 THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR RECALL ORDER OF THE INC OME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 13.11.2019 PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. THE AS SESSEE HAD SUBMITTED WRITTEN SUBMISSION AND COMPILATION OF PAPER BOOK FOR THE FA CT AND CIRCUMSTANCES. IT IS SUBMITTED AS UNDER: 1) UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT THE APPLICANT MAY BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD ONLY BY RECALLING THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IT IS SUBMITTED WITH GREAT RESPECT THAT KEEPING WITH THE STATUTORY RESPECT, THAT IN KEEPING WITH STATUTORY PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE , THE IMPUGNED ORDER MAY BE RECALLED AND APPEAL MAY BE FIXED AGAIN FOR FRESH HE ARING. FROM THE ABOVE, I FIND THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT POINTI NG ANY MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. RATHER BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS AP PLICATION THE ASSESSEE SEEKS A REVIEW OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE GARB O F RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT A REVI EW OF THE ORDER IN THE GARB OF RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IS NO T PERMISSIBLE IN LAW. 3. ACCORDINGLY, THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23/07/2021. SD/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED: 23/07/2021 RAHUL SHARMA, SR. P.S. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. MR. GANPATRAJ N. JAIN MA NO. 281/MUM/2020 3 3. THE CIT(A) - 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI