The ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad V. M/s. Greencity Heritage Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

MA 31/AHD/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4697 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-04-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 24-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S.S. SHUKLA
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 143(3); 254(2)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद ᭠यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ A’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, M.A No.31/Ahd/2019 In आयकर अपील सं./In ITA No. 2855/Ahd/2017 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014 I.T.O., Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad. Vs. Greencity Heritage Pvt. Ltd., C-21, Sursagar Tower, Opp. Satadhar Society, Ghatlodiya, Ahmedabad-380061. PAN: AADCG2829H (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri S.S. Shukla, D.R. Assessee by : None सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 01/04/2022 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 20/04/2022 PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The revenue by way of this Miscellaneous Application is seeking to recall the consolidated order passed by the ITAT in ITA No. 2855/Ahd/2017 for A.Y. 2013-14 vide order dated 27/07/2018 on the reasoning that there is a mistake apparent from the record. M.A No.31/AHD/2019 In ITA No.2855/Ahd/2017 Asstt. Year 2013-14 2 2. The Ld. DR before us submitted that the tax effect involved in the dispute exceeds Rs.50 lacs, precisely amounting to Rs.1,02,04,141/- and therefore the same cannot be dismissed on account of low tax effect by virtue of the CBDT Circular bearing No.3/18 dated 11/07/2018. Accordingly the Ld. DR prayed to recall the order passed by the ITAT for fresh adjudication on merit as the same has been dismissed due to low tax effect by the ITAT inadvertently. 3. On the other hand, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite of the fact that several opportunities were afforded to the assessee. 4. Heard the Ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. In the absence of any co-operation from the side of the assessee but after considering the facts available on record, it was noticed that the AO has made the addition amounting to Rs. 3,21,95,119/- vide order dated 15/03/2016, in the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act. Against, the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted the addition made by the AO vide order dated 29/09/2017. 5. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue preferred an appeal before us. Considering the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue and the quantum of dispute involved in the Assessment and CIT(A) order, it appears that the amount of tax involved in the dispute stands at 1,02,04,141/- which is far more than the limit of Rs.50 lacs as specified by CBDT in its Circular. Accordingly, we hold that there is an apparent mistake in the order of the ITAT which needs to be rectified under the provision of section 254(2) of the Act. Thus we recall the order of the ITAT for fresh adjudication as per the provision of law. M.A No.31/AHD/2019 In ITA No.2855/Ahd/2017 Asstt. Year 2013-14 3 6. The registry is directed to fix the case of fresh hearing on 16/05/2022 under intimation to both the parties. Hence the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is allowed. 7. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on 20/04/2022 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUMITA ROY) (WASEEM AHMED) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 20/04/2022 Manish