Smt. Neelima PravinKumar Khamkar, Kolhapur V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 1, Ichalkranji

MA 359/PUN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Neelima Pravinkumar Khamkar, the proprietor of M/s. Ruby Granites, who filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking to recall an order dated 27-09-2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune. The original order denied her claim for deduction under section 54F of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2011-12, as she could not demonstrate that the construction of a house was completed within three years from the sale of an asset. The Tribunal, after multiple adjournments and hearings, dismissed the Miscellaneous Application, agreeing with the earlier decision and citing a precedent from the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Ranjit Narang.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 132812 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 03-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-11-2022
• Other Referred Cases: Ranjit Narang vs. CIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 54F

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “एक सदस्य मामला” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, PUNE श्री एस.एस. विश्वनेत्र रवि, न्याविक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER विविध आिेदन सं. / MA No.359/PUN/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.1534/PUN/2019) वनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Neelima Pravinkumar Khamkar, Prop. of M/s. Ruby Granites, W. No. 10, House No. 211, Radhakrishna Colony, A/P. Ichalkaranji, Kolhapur-416115 PAN : AHPPK0005P .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Ichalkaranji ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : N O N E Revenue by : Shri Suhas Kulkarni सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 01-09-2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 05-09-2023 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : By this Miscellaneous Application the assessee intends to recall the order dated 27-09-2022 passed by this Tribunal in ITA No. 1534/PUN/2019 for assessment year 2011-12. 2. The ld. AR, Shri M.K. Kulkarni filed application dated 31-08-2023 seeking to grant adjournment. I note that this Miscellaneous Application filed on 03-03-2023 and the Registry issued notice dated 27-02-2023 2 MA No. 359/PUN/2022, A.Y. 2011-12 intimating the date of hearing on 21-04-2023. On perusal of the order sheet, it is noted that the ld. AR requested for adjournment and accordingly it is adjourned to 19-05-2023. Again, the ld. AR filed an application on 19-05-2023 seeking adjournment and accordingly it is adjourned to 16-06-2023. Likewise, the present Miscellaneous Application adjourned from time to time from 04-08-2023 to today 01-09-2023 on the basis of the adjournment applications filed by the ld. AR. It is noted that on 04-08-2023, it was indicated that no adjournment will be granted on next hearing date i.e. today 01-09-2023, but however, an application dated 31-08-2023 filed seeking adjournment which transpires many opportunities were given to the assessee to prosecute its Miscellaneous Application, but however, no representation is forthcoming. Therefore, the adjournment application in terms of reasons recorded on 04-08-2023 is rejected. Therefore, I proceed to hear the appeal with the assistance of ld. DR and perusing the material available on record. 3. The ld. DR, Shri Suhas Kulkarni submits that the present application can be disposed off in the absence of the assessee as there was no mistake apparent on record pointed in the Miscellaneous Application. He drew my attention to page 2 of the Miscellaneous Application and argued that the assessee is rearguing the appeal instead of pointing the mistake apparent on record. He drew my attention to the finding of Tribunal in denying the deduction u/s. 54F of the Act at para 3 of the Tribunal order dated 27-09-2022 and vehemently argued that the assessee failed to prove that the construction of house is completed within stipulated three years from the date of sale of asset which was discussed, adjudicated by this Tribunal and confirmed the order of CIT(A) by placing reliance in the case of Ranjit Narang reported in 317 ITR 332 (All.) of Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad. Upon hearing, the ld. DR and on perusal 3 MA No. 359/PUN/2022, A.Y. 2011-12 of the Tribunal order dated 27-09-2022, I note that this Tribunal confirmed the order of CIT(A) in denying the deduction u/s. 54F of the Act in terms of ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Ranjit Narang (supra), where the assessee failed to show the construction of house is completed within three years in order to claim deduction u/s. 54F of the Act. I note that as rightly pointed by the ld. DR the contention made in the Miscellaneous Application clearly shows rearguing the main appeal and nowhere the mistake apparent on record is pointed by the assessee. Thus, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee fails and it is dismissed. 4. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 05 th September, 2023. Sd/- (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिनाांक / Dated : 05 th September, 2023. रदव आदेश की प्रविविवि अग्रेवर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-2, Kolhapur 4. The Pr. CIT-2, Kolhapur 5. धिभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एक सदस्य मामला” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. गार्ड फ़ाइल / Guard File. //सत्यादपत प्रदत// True Copy// आिेशानुसार / BY ORDER, वररष्ठ दनजी सदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune