ACIT, New Delhi V. Sh. Rajender Bansal, Gurgaon

MA 405/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4273 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

1 M. A No. Del/2019 ACIT Vs. Rajinder Bansal IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER M. A NO. 405/Del/2019 (A.Y 2008-09) in I.T.A .No.1333/Del/2014 ACIT Central Circle-3 New Delhi (APPLICANT) vs RajinderBansal Prop. R. B. Builders, 404, 4 th Floor, Welldone Tech Park Sector-48, Sohna Road, Gurgaon (Haryana)-122002 PAN: AAFPB3301E (RESPONDENT) Applicant by None Respondent by Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER: The present Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the Department seeking for recalling the order dated 28/12/2018 in ITA No. 1333/Del/2014 wherein the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. 2. The Revenue has filed the present Miscellaneous Application on following grounds:- “ (i) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the IT AT has erred in admitting the additional evidences under rule 46A of the IT. Act without appreciating the fact that the opportunities given to the assessee present its case and file the evidence/ proof to substantiate its claim remained unavailed, evidencing the fact that assessee willfully and knowingly chose Date of Hearing 20.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement 20.05.2022 2 M. A No. Del/2019 ACIT Vs. Rajinder Bansal to not to attend the Income Tax Proceedings. (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the IT AT has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,06,85,373/- without appreciating the fact that during the course of assessment proceedings despite five opportunities given to assessee who could not produce evidence/ proof with regards to its capacity for such a huge transaction and genuineness of the transaction.” 3. The Grounds No. 1 & 2 of the present M.A. are on the merit of the case and Ground No. 3 is general in nature. 4. In exercise of powers under section 254(2) of the Act, the Tribunal may amend any order passed by it only to rectify any mistake apparent from the record. The Tribunal cannot revisit its earlier order and go into detail on merit, which is beyond the scope and ambit of the power conferred under Section 254(2) of the Act. The order dated 28/12/2018 passed in ITA No. 1333/Del/2014 is on the merits of the case; now the Department is seeking to review the said order, but failed to point out any mistake apparent on record in the said order. Therefore, we find no merit in the present Miscellaneous Application. Accordingly, the miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20 th May, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.,) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 20 th May, 2022. R.N 3 M. A No. Del/2019 ACIT Vs. Rajinder Bansal Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi