M/s. S.C.Padhee, Sambalpur V. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Sambalpur

MA 35/CTK/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0948 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 05-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: B R PANDA
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 201; 254(2)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK , . . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J M AND SHRI L .P. SAHU, A M MISCELL ANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 35 / CTK /20 1 7 ( ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 2 8 /CTK/201 4 ) ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 1 - 201 2 ) M/S S.C.PADHEE BALIBANDHA, SAMBALPUR VS. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), SAMBALPUR ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : A A QFS 7009 F ( / A PPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI B.R.PANDA, AR /REVENUE BY : SHRI SUBHENDU DUTTA, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 19 /0 8 /2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/09 /2 019 / O R D E R PER L.P.SAHU, A M TH IS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE SEEKING RECALLING OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 04 .0 8 .2017 , PASSED IN ITA NO. 28 /CTK/201 4 FOR A.Y.20 1 1 - 201 2 . 2. WE HAVE HEARD ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL . 3. T HE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCUSSED THE GROUNDS/ARGUMENTS TAKEN BEFORE IT THAT PLANT AND MACHINERY WERE KEPT READY FOR USE FOR THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE, AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS ELIGIBLE FOR DEPRECIATION FOR M.A. NO. 35 /CTK/201 7 2 THE SAME, WHICH APPARENT A MISTAKE ON THE FACE OF RECORD AND THEREFORE, THE ORDER DATED 04.08.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO.28/CTK/2014 MAY KINDLY BE RECALLED. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, L D. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHEN THE PLANT AND MACHINERY WERE PUT TO USE BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR. ACCORDINGLY, THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L AND, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED. 5 . AFTER HEARING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY PERUSING OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER, WE OBSERVE THAT THE TRIBUN AL HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL EVIDENCE AVAILABLE ON RECORD . LD. AR BEFORE US SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ELIGIBLE FOR DEPRECIATION AS THE PLANT AND MACHINERY WERE KEPT READY FOR USE FOR THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, ON PERUSAL OF PARA 29 OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 04.08.2017, WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING PROCEEDINGS, HAS QUERIED THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHEN THE PLANT AND MACHINERY WERE PUT TO USE BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR, HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT REPLY THE SAME. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE TRIBUNALS ORDER, WHICH REQUIRE S RECTIFICATION U/S. 254(2) AND, ACCORDINGLY, SAME IS DISMISSED. M.A. NO. 35 /CTK/201 7 3 6 . IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04 / 09 /2019. SD/ - ( C.M.GARG ) SD/ - ( L.P.SAHU ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK ; DATED 04 / 09 /2019 . . /PKM , S R.P.S. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, ( SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ) , / ITAT, CUTTACK 1. / THE APPELLANT - . M/S S.C.PADHEE BALIBANDHA , SAMBALPUR 2. / THE RESPONDENT - DCIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), SAMBALPUR 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. / GUARD FILE. //TRUE C OPY//