Santosh Singhla, New Delhi V. A.O. Ward-21(8), New Delhi

MA 414/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0394 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PEEYUSH SONKAR
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH E DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI R. P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI K. D. R ANJAN, AM MISC. APP. NO. 414 (DEL) OF 2010 [ IN I. T. APPEAL NO. 356 (DEL) OF 2001 ]. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1997-98. SMT. SANTOSH SINGLA, THE INCOME-TAX OFF ICER, PROP. M/S. ASSOCIATED TIMBERS, B2, VIKAS CHAMBERS, VS. W A R D : 21 (8), A1, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PASCHIM VIHAR, N E W D E L H I. N E W D E L H I. P A N / G I R NO. AQR PS 2503 H. ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SANTOSH PATHAK, A.R.; DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI PEEYUSH SONKAR, SR. D. R .; O R D E R. PER K. D. RANJAN, AM : THIS MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 4 TH JUNE, 2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997- 98 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 21 ST APRIL, 2005. IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED IN THE MISC. APPLICATION THAT THE ITAT, DELHI BENCH A HA S PASSED ORDER ON 21 ST APRIL, 2005 EX-PARTE. THE REASON FOR NON-ATTENDANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARIN G HAS BEEN STATED AS NON-SERVICE OF HEARING AS THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCONTINUED HER BUSINESS DUE T O ILL HEALTH AND BEING BED RIDDEN. THE ASSESSEES HUSBAND HAD LEFT FOR ABROAD TO MAKE A LI VELIHOOD AND HE WAS OUT OF INDIA FOR ALMOST 2 MISC. APP. NO. 414 (DEL) OF 2010 FIVE YEARS DURING THE PERIOD. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THIS M.A., THE LD. SR. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE MISC. APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BEYOND THE PERIOD OF FOUR YEARS AND, THEREFORE, IT IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE I. T. ACT, 1961 THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MAY, AT ANY TIME WITHIN FOUR YEARS, FROM THE DATE OF ORDER, WITH A VIEW TO RECTIFYING A NY MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD, AMEND ANY ORDER PASSED BY IT, UNDER SUB-SECTION 254(1) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, AS PER LAW, ANY MISTAKE WHICH IS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE TRIBUNAL CAN BE RECTIFIED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF FOUR YEARS, FROM THE DATE OF ORDER. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE P ERIOD OF FOUR YEARS HAS EXPIRED ON 20 TH APRIL, 2010 WHEREAS THE MISC. APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED O N 4 TH JUNE, 2010. THEREFORE, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS BEYOND THE PER IOD OF FOUR YEARS PERMITTED UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. SINCE THE MISC. APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEYOND THE PERIOD OF FOUR YEARS, THE SAME CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED AND D ESERVES TO BE DISMISSED AS SUCH. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON : 25 TH FEBRUARY, 2011. SD/- SD/-. [ R. P. TOLANI ] [ K. D. RAN JAN ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 25 TH FEBRUARY, 2011 *MEHTA * COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : - 1. APPLICANT. 3 MISC. APP. NO. 414 (DEL) OF 2010 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT, 4. CIT (APPEALS), 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER. ASSISTANT REGI STRAR, ITAT. 4 MISC. APP. NO. 414 (DEL) OF 2010