ASST CIT 6 (1)(2), MUMBAI V. INDIA STEEL WORKS LTD., MUMBAI

MA 317/MUM/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4067 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C" BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER MA.No. 317/MUM/2021 [ARISING OUT OF ITA.No. 7057/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10)] ACIT – 6(1)(2) Room No. 563B, 5 th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400020 v. M/s. India Steel Works Ltd., 1101, 11 th Floor India Bull Finance Centre S.B. Marg, Eliphinstone (W) Mumbai - 400013 PAN: AAACI1362A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Shri B.K. Bagchi Date of Hearing : 04.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 02.06.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. Through this Miscellaneous Application assessee is requesting to rectify the mistakes which are crept in the ITAT order in ITA.No. 7057/Mum/2019 dated 12.07.2021 for the A.Y.2009-10. MA.No. 317/MUM/2021 M/s. India Steel Works Ltd., 2 2. Inspite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment was sought by the assessee. Therefore, we proceed to dispose off this Miscellaneous Application by hearing Ld. DR. 3. Ld. DR brought to our notice the background of the appeal and findings of the Tribunal, the brief submissions filed by the department through Miscellaneous Application are reproduced below: - “2. The Hon'ble ITAT as per its order in ITA No. 7057/Mum/2019 dated 12.07.2021 had dismissed the appeal filed by the Department in the case of the above mentioned assessee. A copy of the said order is enclosed as Exhibit-1. 3. The Hon'ble Tribunal in its order while dismissing the appeal of the Department, has mentioned: (a) that the Hon’ble ITAT has mentioned the facts of AY2011-12 elaborately instead of the facts of AY 2009-10, as mentioned in para-3 of the order dated 12.07.2021. (b) that the Hon’ble ITAT has mentioned the issues involved in AY - 2009-10 and 2011-12 are identical (c) that the Hon’ble ITAT has not discussed and adjudicated the grounds raised by the Department for the AY 2009-10. 4. Since these are mistakes apparent from records, it is most humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to make necessary corrections in its appellate order and issue appropriate orders to that effect in the matter and oblige.” 4. Considered the submissions of Ld.DR and material placed on record, we observe that the department has raised several grounds of appeal objecting to relief given by the Ld.CIT(A) on the issue of bogus unsecured loans from two parties. However, we observe that the ITAT MA.No. 317/MUM/2021 M/s. India Steel Works Ltd., 3 has given relief to the assessee estimating the disallowance based on the bogus purchases. Now before us, department is in Miscellaneous Application with the plea that ITAT has not discussed and adjudicated the ground raised by the department for the A.Y. 2009-10. In order to appreciate facts on record we deem it fit and proper to recall the order and direct the Registry to fix the appeal for hearing in due course and inform both the parties in this regard. 5. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the department is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 02.06.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai / Dated 02/06/2022 Giridhar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Mumbai. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mum