ARTHMETAL ELECTRICS P. LTD, V. ITO WD (1)(3),

MA 428/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3619 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 07-05-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: J
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 12-06-2009
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRADEEP HEDAOO
• Assessee Lawyers: M SUBRAMANIAN
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH J BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN (JM) & B. RAMAKOTAIAH (A M) M.A. NO. 428/MUM/2009 ARISING OUT OF I.T.A.NO. 239/MUM/2005 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02 ) EARTHMETAL ELECTRICALS P. LTD. 175-D, B.T. COMPOUND MALAD WEST MUMBAI-400 064. VS. ITO WARD 9(1)(3) AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI-400 020. APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN/GIR NO. : AABCE0615K ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M. SUBRAMANIAN DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI PRADEEP HEDAOO ORDER PER N.V. VASUDEVAN, JM :- THIS IS A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE A SSESSEE PRAYING FOR RECTIFICATION OF CERTAIN APPARENT ERRORS IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 2. THE ISSUE THAT WAS CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL WH ICH IS SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS WITH REGARD TO THE SHARE CAPITAL OF RS. 30 LAKHS, WHICH WAS SHOWN BY T HE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS RECEIVED DURING THE PREVIOUS YE AR. THE TRIBUNAL HAD UPHELD THE ADDITION MADE U/S. 68 OF THE ACT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, TREATING THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED. IT IS IN THE ABOVE BACKGROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE MISCELLA NEOUS APPLICATION POINTING OUT CERTAIN APPARENT ERRORS IN THE CONCLUS ION REACHED BY THE TRIBUNAL. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS AP PLICATION, IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED AN AP PEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COUR T IN ITA NO. 590 OF EARTHMETAL ELECTRICALS P. LTD. 2 2005 AND THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT DISMISSED TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY ITS ORDER DATED 15.10.2008. THE ASSESSE E PREFERRED THE APPEAL BEFORE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT AGAINST THE ORD ER OF HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT BY IT S ORDER DATED 5.4.2010 HAD DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO SUMM ON THE PERSONS WHOSE NAMES APPEARED AS SHAREHOLDERS TO FIND OUT WH ETHER THEY ARE FICTITIOUS OR GENUINE. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE SUPREM E COURT ON THE ISSUE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE PRESENT MISCELLA NEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. CONSEQUENTL Y, THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED ON 7 TH DAY OF MAY, 2010. SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- (N.V. VASUDEVAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 7 TH MAY, 2010 COPY TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A)-CONCERNED. 4. THE CIT, CONCERNED. 5. THE DR CONCERNED, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI PS