DCIT CENTRL CIRCLE 1 (2), CHENNAI V. JAYA EDUCATIONAL TRUST, CHENNAI

MA 3/CHNY/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [NaN] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1661 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 01-03-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, ‘ए’ यायपीठ, चे नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ी वी. द ु गा राव, या यक सद य एवं ी जी. मंज ु नाथ, लेखा सद य के सम$ BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Misc. Petition N os . 2 to 5 /C hn y/ 2 0 2 2 (In ITA Nos. 2 9 1 5, 3 1 1 4, 3 1 1 5 / C h n y/ 2 0 1 9 & 91 6 /C h n y/ 2 0 2 0) ( नधा रणवष / A s se s sm e nt Yea r s: 2 01 6- 1 7 , 2 01 2- 1 3 , 20 1 3- 1 4 & 20 17 -1 8 ) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2) Chennai. V s M/s. Jaya Educational Trust, Jaya Bhavan, Periyapalayam High Road, Thiruninravoor, Chennai-602 024. PA N: A A A T J 03 69 D (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT यथ क ओरसे/Respondent by : Mr. Y.Sridhar, C.A स ु नवाईक तार&ख/D a t e o f h e a r i n g : 01.07.2022 घोषणाक तार&ख /D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t : 01.07.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER G.MANJUNATHA, AM: These four Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue are directed against order of the Tribunal in ITA Nos.2915,3114 & 3115/Chny/2019 & 916/Chny/2020 dated 16.07.2021 and relevant to the assessment years 2016-17, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2017-18 respectively. Since, facts are identical and issues pointed out in Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue are identical, therefore, for the sake of convenience, these Misc. 2 Misc.Petition Nos. 2 to 5/Chny/2022 Applications filed by the Revenue were heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order. 2. The Revenue has narrated facts and mistakes stated to be apparent on record from the order of the Tribunal dated 16.07.2021 and relevant contents of the Misc. Application filed by the Revenue in M.A.No.2/Chny/2022 for the assessment year 2016-17 are reproduced as under:- “ 1. I t i s h u m b ly s u b m it t e d t h at t h e H o n ’b l e I TA T h as d i s m is s e d t h e C lT (A ) o rd e r dt . 1 9. 0 8. 2 0 1 9 . Th is d ec isi o n of TA T h as b e e n re n d e r ed p ri ma f a c i e o n t h e b a si s of a d d it i o n a l e v i d e nc e s p ro d u c e d be f ore t h e I TA T, t h e s a m e we re n ot p r od u c e d b ef o re t he A O a n d L d. C I T(A ). 2. Th e as s e s s e e h as p r od u c e d l et t e r of a p p oi nt me n t s of S h ri. K V e n k a t R ed d y a n d S mt . T V Su b h as h i ni, wh e re it is st at e d th at t h ey we r e hi r e d f o r s p ec i f ic t as ks a n d we re n ot in v ol v e d i n d ay t o d ay ma n a g e r i al f u nc t i o ns o f t h e t r u st . 3. Th e as s es s e e h as f u r ni s h e d t h e ev i d e nc es f o r t e r mi n at i o n of s e rv ic es of S hr i K Ve n kat R e dd y a n d S mt . TV S u b ha s h i ni a ft e r t h ey w e re n o t a bl e t o p r ov i d e t he s e rv i c e s f o r wh i c h t h ey w e re hi re d. 4. M o re o v er, wi t h r e g ar d t o re c o v e ry of l o a n s, t h e as s e ss e e h as st a t e d t h at Ar b it rat i o n pr oc e e d i n g s h a v e b e e n i n it i a t e d a n d ha s pr o d uc e d t h e al l re c ords p e rt ai n i n g to a rb it r a ry pro c e e d i n gs a n d pa rt i e s st art e d r e pa y i n g t h e l o a n s. 3 Misc.Petition Nos. 2 to 5/Chny/2022 5. I t i s r es p e ct f u ll y s u b mi tt e d t h a t s i nc e t h e a b o ve a d d i t i o n al ev i d e nc es a s s t at e d i n a b o v e p ara 2 , 3 & 4 we re n ot p r o d uc e d b ef o r e As s e s si n g O f f ic e r & l ea r n e d CI T (A ) i t is p r ay e d t ha t t h e A s s e s s i n g of f ic e r s h o u l d b e p rov i d e d a n o p p ort u n i ty t o ex a m i ne a d d i t i o n al e v i d e n c e s a n d it i s pr a y e d t o re c o ns i d er it s o r de r a n d ma y d e c i d e t h e is s u e o n m e rit s. ” 3. The learned D.R., Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, referring to Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue submitted that there is an error in the order of the Tribunal insofar as finding of the Tribunal with regard to nature of duties performed by Shri K Venkat Reddy and Smt. T.V.Subhashini on the basis of letter of appointments that both were not employees of the assessee, but professionals engaged for performing specific duties and said finding is based on additional evidences filed by the assessee in the form of appointment letters which was not filed before the Assessing Officer as well as the learned CI T(A). Therefore, findings of the Tribunal on the basis of additional evidences without allowing the Assessing Officer to make his comments on said evidences constitute mistake apparent on record, which needs to be rectified u/s.254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4 Misc.Petition Nos. 2 to 5/Chny/2022 4. The learned counsel for the assessee referring to order of the Tribunal dated 16.07.2021 submitted that there is no error in the order of the Tribunal, because findings of the Tribunal on the issue of nature of duties performed b y Shri. K Venkat Redd y and Smt. T.V.Subhashini is on the basis of facts brought out by the Assessing Officer and learned CIT (A) in their orders, where both have referred to appointment letters issued b y the assessee to above t wo consultants. T herefore, the learned A.R submitted that the Tribunal has not considered an y additional evidences to give such a finding and thus, same cannot be considered as mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified u/s.254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. W e have heard both the parties and considered relevant contents of Misc. Application filed by the Revenue for all assessment years and we find that there is no merit in the Misc. Applications filed by the Revenue on the issue of observation of the Tribunal, 5 Misc.Petition Nos. 2 to 5/Chny/2022 insofar as loans given to two individuals, Shri. K Venkat Redd y and Smt. T.V.Subhashini, because findings of the Tribunal is based on facts brought on record by the Assessing Officer in para 1 on page 3 of his order, where the Assessing Officer had specifically referred to letter of appointment issued by t he Trust to above two consultants. Further, the learned CIT(A) also considered appointment letters issued by the Trust to above two consultants and also scope of work and arrived at conclusion on the issue. T he Tribunal, after considering relevant facts brought on record and also evidences placed by the assessee had given its categorical finding while adjudicating the issue and thus, same cannot be considered as mistake apparent on record. The pleadings of the Assessing Officer regarding admission of additional evidences is completely misplaced and devoid of merits and thus, we are of the considered view that the Revenue has failed to make out a case of prima-facie mistake apparent on record from the order of the Tribunal dated 16.07.2021 from all four assessment years, but 6 Misc.Petition Nos. 2 to 5/Chny/2022 what was sought through Misc. Applications is to review decision rendered by the Tribunal in the given facts &circumstances of the case. In our considered view, which is not permissible under the la w. Hence, Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue for four assessment years are dismissed. 6. In the result, Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue for all four assessment years are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 1 st July , 2022 Sd/- Sd/- ( वी. द ु गा राव) (जी. मंज ु नाथ) (V.Durga Rao) (G.Manjunatha) *या यक सद,य /Judicial Member लेखा सद,य / Accountant Member चे*नई/Chennai, /दनांक/Dated 1 st July, 2022 DS आदेश क त3ल4प अ5े4षत/Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. आयकर आय ु 6त (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आय ु 6त/CIT 5. 4वभागीय त न:ध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF.