THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-14(3)(1), MUMBAI V. TUFF GUARD FORCE PRIVATE LIMITED, GHATKOPAR WEST

MA 369/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves a miscellaneous application filed by the revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 12.07.2022. The application was filed on 12.05.2023, which was beyond the six-month period allowed for filing such applications. The revenue argued that the delay should be considered from the date the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) received knowledge of the ITAT's order, which was on 20.09.2022. However, the Tribunal found the application to be time-barred and dismissed it, citing the lack of authority to condone the delay as per the relevant legal provisions and precedents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 125931 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 24-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Dariyapur Shetakari Sahakari Ginning and Pressing factory Vs ACIT, Raja Malvinder Singh Vs JOI, Kartori Global Ltd. Vs DCIT
• Laws Referred To: Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, Section 254(3) of the Income Tax Act, Rule 35 of the ITAT Rules
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAKASH KISHINCHANDNI
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA No. 369/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) [Arising Out of ITA 2450/Mum/2021] ITO-14(3)(1) Room No. 554, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 Vs. Tuff Guard Force Pvt. Ltd. E207, Kailash Esplade, Opp. Shreyas Cinema, L.B.S. Marg, Ghatkopar West, Mumbai-400086 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AABCB4892K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri. Prakash Kishinchandni Date of Hearing 25.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement 05.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH :- 1. This miscellaneous application filed by the revenue is directed against the order of ITAT vide ITA No. 2450/Mum/2021 dated 12.07.2022. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel pointed out that there is a delay in filling the miscellaneous application. He further submitted that P a g e | 2 MA No. 369/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 Tuff Guard Force Pvt Ltd the order of ITAT dated 12.07.2022 was received in the office of the Ld. PCIT on 20/09/2022, however, the miscellaneous appeal has been filed on 12.05.2023 beyond the period of limitation as prescribed in Section 254 (2) of the Act. The Ld. DR could not controvert this fact that there is delay in filling this miscellaneous application. 3. Heard both the sides and perused the materials on record. We find that u/s 254(3) off the Act, the law stipulates that the ITAT shall send a copy of the order passed by it to the assessee and the Principal Commissioner. Further Rule 35 of the ITAT Rule also requires that the orders are required to be communicated to the assessee and Commissioner of Income Tax. 4. In this case of the assessee, the Ld. Pr. CIT has received the order of the ITAT on 20.09.2022 therefore the Pr.CIT has got knowledge of the order of the ITAT on 20.09.2022. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Dariyapur Shetakari Sahakari Ginning and Pressing factory Vs ACIT (2021) 123 taxmann.com 301 held that period of limitation prescribed in Section 254(2) would commence from the date when affected party got knowledge of decision..In this case the Ld. PCIT got knowledge of the ITAT order on 20.09.2022 therefore the limitation period of six months for filling the miscellaneous P a g e | 3 MA No. 369/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 Tuff Guard Force Pvt Ltd appeal would start from 01.10.2022 and ended on 31.03.2023. However, the Revenue has filed the impugned miscellaneous application on 12.05.2023 beyond the limitation period as referred above. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances the delay in filling the miscellaneous application cannot be condoned as also held by Hon’ble Panjab & Harayana High Court in the case of Raja Malvinder Singh Vs JOI 278 ITR 568 (P&H) and by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Kartori Global Ltd. Vs DCIT (2020) 16 Taxmann.com 9/24 (Karnataka) that the Tribunal has no power to condone delay in filling the miscellaneous application beyond the period of 6 months. Therefore, the miscellaneous application filed by the revenue is dismissed as time barred 6. In the result the miscellaneous application filed by the revenue is dismissed. Order Pronounced in Open Court on 05.09.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Place: Mumbai Date 05.09.2023 ANIKET SINGH RAJPUT/STENO P a g e | 4 MA No. 369/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 Tuff Guard Force Pvt Ltd आदेश की प्रतितलति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यावपि प्रवि //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीलीय अतधकरण/ ITAT, Bench, Mumbai.