National Bakery Machine, Meerut V. ITO, Meerut

MA 291/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3633 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA No. 291/Del/2018 (arising out of ITA No.3997/Del/2013) (for Assessment Year : 2009-10) National Bakery Machine C/o. B. P. Gupta & Co., Tax Law Consultants, 186, W.K. Road, Opp. Nagin Prakashan, Meerut-01(UP) PAN No. AAEFN 1513 H Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1) Meerut (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri V. Rajkumar, Adv. Revenue by Shri Sandeep Kumar, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 17.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 07.07.2022 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : The present Misc. Application (MA) is filed by the assessee u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “The Act”) against the order of the Tribunal dated 23.05.2017 in respect of ITA No.3997/Del/2013 for A.Y. 2009-10. 2. Through this Misc. Application (MA), the grievance of the Assessee is that assessee has raised alternate ground being 2 Ground No.5 in the appeal but the same has not been adjudicated as there is no mention about the same in the order of the Tribunal. He therefore submitted that non-consideration of the ground is an apparent mistake on record and therefore the order be rectified. 3. Learned DR on the other hand submitted that since there is no mistake in the order of Tribunal and since the entire issue has been remitted to CIT(A), assessee should have no grievance. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue raised by the assessee is about the non-adjudication of the ground No.5. At this point, it would be relevant to point to the relevant portion of the MA Application which reads as under: “2. The grounds of appeal as agitated before the Hon’ble Tribunal contained an alternative ground on quantum vide Ground No.5. About that ground there is no apparent mention in the order of the Tribunal. That is so for it was neither argued nor discussed during the hearing before the Hon’ble Tribunal.”(emphasis supplied) 5. Thus the highlighted portion of the MA, which is stated hereinabove shows that the assessee clearly admits that the issue was neither argued nor discussed during the hearing before the Tribunal. We are of the view that if the issue has neither been argued by the assessee before the Tribunal, there cannot be a mistake apparent from record as contemplated u/s 254(2) of the 3 Act. We, therefore, find no reason to rectify the order. Thus, the MA of the assessee is dismissed. 6. In the result, MA of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 07.07.2022 Sd/- Sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR US) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Date:- 07.07.2022 PY* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI