1 M.A. NO.292 /MUM/2015 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES I, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA(JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA (ACOUNTANT MEMBER) M.A. NO.292 /MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) THE DY.CIT, 14(2)(1) MUMBAI 20 VS INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD INDIA OIL BHAVAN G-9, ALI YAVAR JUNG MARG BANDRA (E), MUMBAI 51 PAN :ASAQCI1681G (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI JAVED AKHTAR RESPONDENT BY SHRI R MURTLIDHAR DATE OF HEARING : 01-07-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : -07-2016 O R D E R PER ASHWANI TANEJA, AM THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY TH E REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 3662/MUM/20 08 DT 16-07-2009 WHEREIN APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS DISMISSED ON THE GROUND THAT APPROVAL OF COD (COMMITTEE ON DISPUTES) WAS NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE REVENUE. THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS REPRODUCED HERE UNDER FOR THE SAKE OF READY REFERENCE: 2 M.A. NO.292 /MUM/2015 YOUR HUMBLE PETITIONER HEREIN IS THE ASSISTANT COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - 1.-1(2)(1), MUMHAI WHO HAS BEEN CONFER RED WITH THE JURISDICTION OVER THE CASE OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED RESPONDENTS M/S. IN DIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., ASSESSED UNDER PAN - AAACII681G. 2. THE HON. TRIBUNAL WAS PLEASED TO PASS THE ORDER ITA NO. 3662/M/08 DATED 16.07.2009 DISMISSING THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE REVENUE ON THE GROUND THAT APPROVAL OF COD (COMMITTEE ON DISPUTE), REQUIRED FOR AN APPEAL TO BE FILED IN THE CASE OF A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAK ING WAS NOT OBTAINED. 3. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 17.02.2011 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.1883 OF 2011 HELD THAT THE MECHANISM OF COD HAS OUTLIVED ITS UTILITY AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE CHANGED SCENARIO HAS RECALLED THE FOLL OWING ORDERS REPORTED IN: I) 1995 SUPP (4) 5CC 541 DATED 11.10.1991 II) (2004) 65CC 437 DATED 07.01.1994. III) (2007) 7 5CC 39 DATED 20.07.2007. IN VIEW OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT D ATED 17.02.2011 CITED (SUPRA), THE APPROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE ON DIS PUTE IS NO LONGER REQUIRED FOR AN APPEAL TO BE PURSUED IN THE CASE OF A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING. 2. WE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES WITH REGARD TO PRELIMINAR Y ADMISSIBILITY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ON THE GROUND OF ITS LIMITATION. IT IS NOTED BY US THAT THE TRIBUNAL PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON 16-0 7-2009. IT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE LD.DR APPEARING BEFORE US ON THE B ASIS OF RECORD PRODUCED BEFORE US THAT THE SAID ORDER WAS RECEIVED BY THE C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ON 25-08-2009. THE 4 YEARS PERIOD EXPIRED FROM TH E DATE OF PASSING OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON 15-07-2013 WHEREAS THE IMPUGNED M ISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BEFORE US HAS BEEN FILED ON 14-12-2015. IT IS FURTHER NOTED THAT THE JUDGEMENT PASSED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN TH E CASE OF ELECTRONICS CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD VS UOI WHICH HAS BEEN REL IED UPON BY THE REVENUE IN ITS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS ALSO PASSED ON 17 -02-2011. THE TRIBUNAL CAN PASS AN ORDER U/S 254(2)WITHIN 4 YEARS FROM THE DAT E OF THE ORDER SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED. 3 M.A. NO.292 /MUM/2015 3. WE HAVE VIEWED THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FROM ALL THE ANGLES AND FIND THAT IT IS TIMEBARRED. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPL ICATION HAS BEEN FILED BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD OF 4 YEARS AND, THEREFORE, TH E SAME IS DISMISSED BEING BARRED BY LIMITATION. 4. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY T HE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON THIS 01 ST DAY OF JULY, 2016. SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (ASHWANI TANEJA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DT :01 ST JULY, 2016 PK/- COPY TO : 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE , I-BENCH (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES