M/s Simhadri Constructions, Visakhapatnam V. The ITO, Ward-2(1), Visakhapatnam

MA 45/VIZ/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3668 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 30-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G S S GOPINATH
• Assessee Lawyers: S V SATHILINGAM PARTNER
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH: VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NOS. 45 TO 47/VIZAG/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS.85 TO 87/VIZ/2006) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02 TO 2003-04 M/S SIMHADRI CONSTRUCTIONS, VISAKHAPATNAM VS. ITO WARD-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.AAPFS 5858 K APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.V. SATHILINGAM, PARTNER RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.S.S. GOPINATH, DR O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THESE THREE PETITIONS U/S 2 54(2) OF THE ACT WITH REFERENCE TO THE COMMON ORDER DATED 05.6.2009 PASSE D IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA 85, 86 & 87/V/2006. IN THE SAID OR DER, THE TRIBUNAL HAD SET ASIDE THE MATTER OF ESTIMATING THE BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH CERTAIN DIRECTIONS. 2. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PETI TION ARE THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS PASSED A CLEAR ORDER WITH CLEAR DIRECTIONS. HO WEVER THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS COMPLETE D THE ASSESSMENT WITHOUT CONSIDERING ALL THE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY HIM. H ENCE, BY FILING THESE PETITIONS, THE ASSESSEES PRAY FOR ISSUING SUITABLE DIRECTIONS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. WE WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY HERE THAT THE POWER VESTED WITH THE TRIBUNAL U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT IS LIMITED TO AMEND THE ORDER PASSED BY IT U/S 254(1) IN 2 ORDER TO CORRECT THE MISTAKE NOTICED BY IT OR BROUG HT TO ITS NOTICE EITHER BY THE ASSESSEE OR THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE HA S ITSELF HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS CRYSTAL CLEAR. THE PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE REDRESSED BY US U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT. HENCE AL L THE THREE PETITIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE. 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE MISCELLANEOUS PE TITIONS ARE DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY ON 30 TH APRIL, 2010. SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PVV/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM DATE : 30-4-2010 A COPY OF THIS ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 01 M/S SIMHADRI CONSTRUCTIONS, 49-26-44/7 MADHURANA GAR, VISAKHAPATNAM 02 THE ITO WARD-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM 03 THE CIT (A), VISAKHAPATNAM 04 THE CIT-2, VISAKHAPATNAM 05 THE DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPAATNAM 06 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH