DCIT,CC-XVIII,Kolkata, Kolkata V. Sabita Dey, Kolkata

MA 3/KOL/2022

AI Insights

The case involves a Miscellaneous Application by the Revenue under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging a previous Tribunal order regarding the weight of jewellery assessed during a search operation in the case of Sabita Dey for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The Revenue contended that there was an apparent mistake in the recorded weight of the jewellery in the Tribunal's order. However, the Tribunal noted that the issue had been previously decided and that the jewellery had been released following an administrative approval from the Income Tax Department, as no outstanding demand was present.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 128680 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-02-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'ए' पीठ, कोलकाता म ें IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA डॉ. मनीष बोरड, ल े खा सदस्य एवं श्री संजय शमा ा , न्याधयक सदस्य क े समक्ष Before DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No. 3/KOL/2022 Arising out of I.T.A. No.: 57/KOL/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 DCIT, Central Circle-XVIII, Kolkata..........................Appellant Vs. Sabita Dey............................................................Respondent [PAN: AAIPD 9654 M] Appearances by: Sh. P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Sh. Saumitra Choudhury, Adv., appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Date of concluding the hearing : February 17 th , 2023 Date of pronouncing the order : March 28 th , 2023 ORDER Per Manish Borad, Accountant Member: This Miscellaneous Application at the instance of the Revenue u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order of this Tribunal in ITA No. 57/KOL/2015 dated 01.10.2019 pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13. M.A. No. 3/KOL/2022 Arising out of I.T.A. No.: 57/KOL/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sabita Dey. Page 2 of 3 2. Registry has informed that the present Miscellaneous Application is time barred by 641 days. Condonation application has been filed by the Revenue and the reason for the said delay is on account of COVID-19 restrictions and since Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has excluded the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 for the purpose of limitation, we condone the delay and admit the Miscellaneous Application for adjudication. 3. In the Miscellaneous Application it is stated at the end of the Revenue that in para 28.1 of the impugned order weight of the jewellery is mentioned as 662.4 gm whereas as per the valuation report of the jewellery prepared by the Government valuer during search operation the weight of the jewellery is 1161.420 gm and 80.6 caret of diamond. It is further submitted that since it is an apparent mistake, the same needs to be rectified. 4. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the assessee opposed the request made by ld. D/R stating that on 24.12.2021 Income Tax Department has given an administrative approval for release of seized jewellery in the case of the assessee and the seized jewellery was released. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We notice that the issue regarding the weight of jewellery has been dealt by this Tribunal and a decision has been taken on the said issue. Further, on 24.12.2021 Income Tax Department has given an administrative approval for release of seized jewellery in the case of Sabita Dey (deceased) and the total jewellery seized has been released as no demand was outstanding. M.A. No. 3/KOL/2022 Arising out of I.T.A. No.: 57/KOL/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sabita Dey. Page 3 of 3 Under these given facts and circumstances of the case we fail to find any merit in the instant Miscellaneous Application since necessary effect to the impugned order and actions by Revenue authorities has already been taken. Accordingly, this Miscellaneous Application at instance of the Revenue become infructuous. 6. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is dismissed as per terms indicated above. Kolkata, the 28 th March, 2023 Sd/- Sd/- [Sonjoy Sarma] [Manish Borad] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 28.03.2023 Bidhan (P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. DCIT, Central Circle-XVIII, Kolkata. 2. Sabita Dey, 5, Queens Park, Iron Side Road, Ballygunge, Kolkata-700 019. 3. CIT(A)-21, Kolkata. 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. //True copy // By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches Kolkata