KALPESH RATILAL GARDHARIA, KOLHAPUR V. ITO WARD- 2(3), KOLHAPUR

MA 356/PUN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Kalpesh Ratilal Gardharia, the applicant, who filed a Miscellaneous Application (M.A. No. 356/PUN/2022) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 19-10-2022 concerning the assessment year 2010-11. The applicant argued that ground No. 4 of his appeal was not adjudicated in the Tribunal's earlier decision. The Tribunal reviewed the application and confirmed that all grounds, including the legal challenge to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer and the merits of the case, were adequately addressed in the original ruling. The Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Application, stating it was devoid of any merits and reiterated that the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer was correctly exercised.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 301459 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 20-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 31-10-2022
• Other Referred Cases: JCB India Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT (2017) 398 ITR 189/251 Taxman 143
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE SINGLE MEMBER CASE BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No. 356/PUN/2022 Arising out of ITA No. 1850/PUN/2019 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Kalpesh Ratilal Gardharia Plot No. 17, 1183E Takala, Rajratna Apartment, Karver KOLHAPUR – 416 008 PAN: AJFPG 7760 H Applicant Vs. The I.T.O. Ward 2(3), Kolhapur Respondent Applicant by : Shri S.N. Puranik Respondent by : Shri Ganesh B. Budruk Date of Hearing : 21-04-2023 Date of Pronouncement : 24-4-2023 ORDER This Misc. application preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Tribunal dated 19-10-2022 in ITA No. 1850/PUN/2019 for A.Y. 2010-11. 2. I have perused the Misc. application filed by the assessee and given careful consideration to the contents therein. The assessee has contended that ground No. 4 of the assessee has not been adjudicated in the Tribunal’s order. I find that ground No. 4 in the grounds of appeal has been reproduced in the order of the Tribunal and is inclusive within grounds No. 1 to 5 as the grounds on merits. The assessee has also raised a legal ground preferred as an additional ground challenging jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal had first adjudicated the legal ground raised by the assessee i.e. whether the Assessing Officer has jurisdiction or not for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act and subsequent proceedings. That after giving thoughtful consideration and detailed finding vide pars 6 and 7 it had already been held by the Tribunal at para 7 specifically that there is no infirmity with the jurisdiction exercised by the A.O in passing the re-assessment order dated 13- 2 M.A. No. 356/PUN/2022 in ITA No. 1850/PUN/2019 Kalpesh Ratilal Gardharia A.Y. 2010-11 12-2017 in the case of the assessee and therefore, the additional ground raised by the assessee was dismissed. Thereafter, the Tribunal from para 8 of its order had dealt with the grounds on merits i.e. grounds No. 1 to 5 and after detailed analyses and reasons recorded on facts had restored the said grounds back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication as per law with a specific finding in the light of decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of JCB India Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT (2017) 398 ITR 189/251 Taxman 143. Therefore, the Tribunal has dealt in its order both the legal ground raised by way of additional ground challenging jurisdiction of the A.O and the Tribunal has also dealt with the grounds on merits which are grounds No. 1 to 5. Therefore, the contention of the assessee that ground No. 4 individually has not been adjudicated is infructuous, incorrect and invalid. The ld. A.R at the time of hearing started to argue the case again on merits in so far so asking for review of the order passed by the Tribunal, which is not permissible within the jurisdiction u/s 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In view thereof, the Misc. application filed by the assessee is dismissed being devoid of any merits. 3. In the result, the Misc. application is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 24 th day of April 2023. Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune; Dated, the 24 th day of April 2023. Ankam Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT -2 Kolhapur 4. CIT(A) Kolhapur 5. The D.R. ITAT SMC Bench Pune. 6. Guard File BY ORDER, /// TRUE COPY /// Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Pune. 3 M.A. No. 356/PUN/2022 in ITA No. 1850/PUN/2019 Kalpesh Ratilal Gardharia A.Y. 2010-11 Date 1 Draft dictated on 21-04-2023 Sr.PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 21-04-2023 Sr.PS/PS 3 Draft proposed and placed before the second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by second Member AM/JM 5 Approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr.PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on 24-04-2023 Sr.PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of order 24-04-2023 Sr.PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk 24-04-2023 Sr.PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R 11 Date of dispatch of order