ACIT, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad V. Owens Corning Industries (India) Pvt Ltd (previously known as Saint Gobain Vetrotex India Ltd), Mahabubnagar

MA 45/Hyd/2023

AI Insights

The case involves a Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in a previous appeal concerning Owens Corning Industries (India) Pvt. Ltd. The Revenue sought to challenge the Tribunal's earlier decision, arguing that the disposal of the assessee's appeal before that of the Department could predispose the ITAT towards the assessee's position. However, the application was filed 237 days late, leading to a dispute over the condonation of delay. The Tribunal, referencing Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1995, found that it lacked the authority to condone such a delay and thus dismissed the M.A. in limine.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 129921 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 01-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 15-04-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1995
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

MA No 45 of 2023 Ownens Corning Industries Page 1 of 3 आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member M.A. No.45/Hyd/2023 (Arising out of ITA No.256/Hyd/2016) Assessment Year: 2004-05 ACIT, Circle 5(1) Hyderabad Vs. Owens Corning Industries (India) Pvt. Ltd (previously known as Saint Gobain Vetrotex India Ltd) Mahaboobnagar PAN:AAACV9858N (Appellant) PAN: (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue by: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR Date of hearing: 02/06/2023 Date of pronouncement: 02/06/2023 ORDER Per Laliet Kumar, J.M This miscellaneous application dated 26.4.2023 filed by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal in ITA No.256/Hyd/2016 dated 22.02.2022. At the outset, the registry has pointed out that there was delay of 237 days in filing of the petition by the Revenue. The reason for condonation of delay in filing of the M.A.are mentioned as under: “It is submitted before the Hon’ble Bench that the M.A is being filed on account of the disposal of the appeal of the assessee ahead of that of the Department, despite the fact that this would pre-dispose the ITAT towards its stand taken already MA No 45 of 2023 Ownens Corning Industries Page 2 of 3 in respect of a common issue, even before the appeal of the Department is heard, soon after this departure from the common practice of taking up cross appeals simultaneously by the ITAT, has come to the notice of this office. 2. It was submitted by the learned DR that the delay in filing of this M.A. may be condoned. 3. Per contra, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Tribunal has no power to condone the delay in filing the rectification application and the present application was filed by the Revenue after a period of 237 days, therefore, there is no ground is made for condonation of delay in filing M.A. 4. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused material available on record. Admittedly, u/s 254(2) the order of the Tribunal are subject to rectification, in case the assessee files petition for rectification of the order within six months from the date of the order. For the above said purpose, we reproduce sec 254(2) of the I.T. Act which read as under: “Section 254(2) in The Income- Tax Act, 1995 (2) The Appellate Tribunal may, at any time within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it under sub-secction (1), and shall make such amendment if the mistake is brought to its notice by the assessee or the 2 Assessing] Officer” 5. From a bare perusal of the above, it is abundantly clear that the Tribunal does not have the power to condone the delay in filing of M.A. As the Tribunal does not have the power to condone the delay, therefore, the M.A filed by the Revenue is barred by limitation and accordingly the MA filed by the Revenue is dismissed in limini. MA No 45 of 2023 Ownens Corning Industries Page 3 of 3 6. In the result, M.A. filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 2 nd June, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (R.K. PANDA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (LALIET KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 2 nd June, 2023. Vinodan/sps Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 Owens Corning Industries (India) (P) Ltd. (previously known as Saint Gobain Vetrotex India Ltd), Bangalore Highway, TGhimmapur 509325, Kothu Mandal, Mahaboobnagar Distt. 2 Asstt. CIT, Circle 5(1) Hyderabad 3 Pr. CIT-4, Hyderabad 4 DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 5 Guard File By Order