Krishna Metafab Pvt ltd, Gurgaon V. Pr. CIT, Gurgaon

MA 368/DEL/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9821 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 05-09-2023
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK UPADHYA
• Section: 263; 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘H’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Miscellaneous Application No.368/Del/2023 (In ITA No.4813/Del/2019) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Krishna Metafab Pvt. Ltd., C/o Manoj Prabhu & Associates, CA 410, Deep Plaza, Opp. Civil Court, Sohna Road, Gurgaon (Hr.) PIN: 122 001 Vs. Principal CIT, Gurgaon PAN :AADCK8490J (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER Present application has been filed by the assessee with the following prayer: a) Restoration of the Appeal No. 4813/Del/2019 or set-aside to A.O. which was dismissed by Hon’ble Bench-“H” vide order dated 26.08.2023; Department by Shri Vivek Upadhya, Sr. DR Assessee by N o n e Date of hearing 17.11.2023 Date of pronouncement 29.11.2023 2 M.A. No.368/Del/2023 b) Re-fixation of the appeal for hearing; and c) Any other order or direction, which the Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit and proper. 2. At the time of call, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notice. Even on the earlier occasion i.e. 20.10.2023, no one had appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notice. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the application ex parte qua the assessee after hearing learned Departmental Representative and based on the material available on record. 3. The corresponding appeal of the assessee arising out of an order passed under Section 263 of the Income-Tax Act,1961 was listed for hearing before the Division Bench on 26.06.2023. On the date of hearing of the appeal, full opportunity was granted to the learned counsel appearing for the assessee and learned Departmental Representative. 4. After considering the submissions made at length by both the parties, the Tribunal vide order dated 26.06.2023 dismissed the appeal upholding the order passed under Section 263 of the Act. In the present application, assessee has made a prayer to restore the appeal and refix it for hearing or set it aside to the Assessing Officer. Though, 3 M.A. No.368/Del/2023 in the body of the present application assessee has not mentioned the provision under which he has preferred the application, however, we assume that assessee has filed the application under Section 254(2) of the Act. On a reading of the said provision, it is very much clear, the jurisdiction under the said provision can be exercised only to rectify a mistake apparent on the face of record. In the present application, assessee has not even mentioned a single word about the purported mistake in the order of the Tribunal which requires rectification. 5. On the contrary, from the prayer made in the application, it is very much evident, assessee seeks review of the appellate order. This, in our view, is not possible under Section 254(2) of the Act. Therefore, we hold that the present application filed by the assessee is thoroughly misconceived, hence, deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, we do so. 6. In the result, the application is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court on 20.11.2023. Sd/- Sd/- ( M. BALAGANESH ) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Dated: 29 th November, 2023 Mohan Lal 4 M.A. No.368/Del/2023 Copy forwarded to: 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi