M.B. BANDRAWALA, V. ASST CIT CEN CIR 20,

MA 29/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8768 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOLI SRINIVAS RAO

Judgement Text

, , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES H, MUMBAI .. , ! ' #$ %& , ' ', ( BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, AM AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM )) '* ./ MA NO.29/MUM/2012 ( ,-$ . / ARISING OUT OF IT(SS)A NO.859/MUM/2003) ( $ '* / / / / BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1988 TO 19.08.1998) MRS.M.B.BANDRAWALLA DINA VILLA, 2 ND FLOOR, 2 PALI ROAD BANDRA (WEST), MUMBAI 400 050. PAN : AAJPB9796P. THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 20 MUMBAI. ( ' / // / APPLICANT) * * * * / VS. ( /012/ RESPONDENT) ' 3 33 3 4 4 4 4 / APPLICANT BY : SHRI ASHOK PATIL /012 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GOLI SRINIVAS RAO * 3 $! / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 20.07.2012 567 3 $! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.07.2012 ' % ' % ' % ' % / / / / O R D E R PER R.S.SYAL, AM : THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S.254(2) OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961 HAS BEEN MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE PRAYING FOR THE RECT IFICATION OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 21.09.2011 IN IT(SS)A NO.859/MUM/200 3. 2. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED T HAT THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING OFF THE REVENUES APPEAL IN THE CASE OF M RS.M.B.BANDRAWALA SUSTAINED THE ADDITION OF ` 70 LAKH THROUGH PARA 15 OF ITS ORDER. HE SUBMITTED THAT THIS ADDITION WAS NOT SUSTAINABLE AS NO MATERI AL WAS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH TO INDICATE THAT THE ON-MONEY TO T HIS EXTENT WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. IN THE OPPOSITION THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRE SENTATIVE ARGUED THAT JAISINGH BROTHERS PARTED WITH ` 1.40 CRORE WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY SHRI M.N.KHARIWALA AND MRS.M.B.BANDRAWALLA IN EQUAL PROP ORTION OF ` 70 LAKH MA NO.29/MUM/2012 MRS.M.B.BANDRAWALLA. 2 EACH. WHILE REFERRING TO THE TRIBUNAL ORDER, THE LE ARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE CONTENDED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS CATE GORICALLY CONSIDERED THE RELEVANT FACTS ABOUT THE PAYMENT BY JAISINGH BROTHE RS AMOUNTING TO ` 1.40 CRORE. HE FURTHER REFERRED TO PARA 20 OF THE ORDER BY WHICH THE TRIBUNAL DELETED THE PROTECTIVE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF SHRI D.B.BA NDRAWALLA TO THE EXTENT OF ` 70 LAKH AND ` 40 LAKH FOR WHICH SUBSTANTIVE ADDITIONS WERE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI M.N.KHARIWALA. IT WAS SUBM ITTED THAT THE ADDITION OF ` 70 LAKH WAS MADE ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS IN THE HANDS OF THE PRESENT ASSESSEE AND ON PROTECTIVE BASIS IN THE HANDS OF SHRI D.B.BANDRA WALLA. SINCE THE ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE HANDS OF SH RI D.B.BANDRAWALLA, WHICH WAS MADE ON PROTECTIVE BASIS, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS NOT OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO REQUEST FOR THE DELETION OF ADDITION MA DE ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL. 4. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS SUSTAINED THE ADDITION OF ` 70 LAKH THROUGH PARA 15 OF ITS ORDER BY CONSIDERING ALL THE RELEVAN T FACTS. ELABORATE DISCUSSION HAS BEEN MADE ON THIS ISSUE WHICH STARTS FROM PARA 2 OF THE ORDER. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT FACTS THE TRIBUNAL SUSTAIN ED THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF SMT.M.B.BANDRAWALLA TO THE EXTENT OF ` 70 LAKH. WE ARE UNABLE TO FIND ANY MISTAKE MUCH LESS THE MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD REQUIRING ANY RECTIFICATION IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE LEARNED AR HAS ONCE AGAI N REARGUED THE CASE IN AN ATTEMPT TO PERSUADE THE BENCH FOR DEVIATING FROM TH E EARLIER VIEW TAKEN BY IT. IT IS AXIOMATIC THAT THE TRIBUNAL IS NOT EMPOWERED TO REVIEW ITS ORDER. CONSIDERING THE SCOPE OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 254(2), WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE IMPUGNED OR DER REQUIRING ANY RECTIFICATION. MA NO.29/MUM/2012 MRS.M.B.BANDRAWALLA. 3 5. 8 $9 ' 3 )) '* !8: 3 :$ ;< IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 20 TH JULY, 2012. . ' % 3 567 ='*9 6 3 > SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (R.S.SYAL) ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' / JUDICIAL MEMBER ! ' ! ' ! ' ! ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; ='* DATED 20 TH JULY, 2012. DEVDAS* ' % 3 /'$#) ? )7$ ' % 3 /'$#) ? )7$ ' % 3 /'$#) ? )7$ ' % 3 /'$#) ? )7$/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ' / THE APPLICANT. 2. /012 / THE RESPONDENT. 3. @ () / THE CIT(A) CENTRAL-IV, MUMBAI. 4. @ / CIT 5. )C> /'$'* , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. >D E / GUARD FILE. ' %* ' %* ' %* ' %* / BY ORDER, 0)$ /'$ //TRUE COPY// , , , ,/ // /; : ; : ; : ; : ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, MUMBAI