Dr. V. Sudarshini, Bengaluru V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(2), Bengaluru

MA 46/BANG/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7548 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 29-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMASUBRAMANIAN
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MP NO.46/BANG/2019 [ IN I TA NO. 741/BANG/2018 ] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 DR. V. SUDARSHINI, # 1324, SOBHA DEW FLOWER APARTMENTS, SARAKKI MAIN ROAD, 4TH CROSS, J.P. NAGAR 1ST PHASE, BENGALURU 560 078. PAN: ADCPV 3784B VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3)(2), BENGALURU. APP EL L ANT RESPONDENT APP ELL ANT BY : SHRI S. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, CA R E SPONDENT BY : SHRI M. RAJASEKHAR , ADDL.C IT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 19. 0 7 . 201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 . 0 7 . 201 9 O R D E R PER N V VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE U/S. 254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 [THE ACT] PRAYING FOR RE CTIFICATION OF CERTAIN APPARENT ERRORS IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 2. AS FAR AS ITA NO.741/BANG/2018 IS CONCERNED, THE TRIBUNAL CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON OR BEFORE THE LAST DATE OF LIMITATION FOR ISSUE OF SUCH NOTICE. THE ADMITTED POSITION IS THAT MP NO.46/BANG/2019 PAGE 2 OF 4 THE LAST DATE FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 148 WAS 31. 3.2015. THE TRIBUNAL CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED O N 30.3.2015. THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THIS REGARD ARE CONT AINED IN THE PARA 24 & 25 OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER WHICH READS AS FOLLOWS:- 24. IN THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.741/ BANG/2018, THE ONLY ISSUE IS WITH REGARD TO VALIDITY OF NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT IT WAS ISSUED BEYOND SIX YEA RS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE FACTS AS IT EXISTS IN THIS CASE IS IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS AS IT EXISTS IN THE CASE OF OTHER TWO ASSESSEES. IN THIS CASE, RECORDS SHOW THAT A NOTIC E U/S. 148 OF THE ACT DATED 31.03.2015 WAS ISSUED BY THE AO. THE REC ORDS FURTHER SHOW THAT THIS NOTICE WAS GIVEN TO THE POSTAL AUTHO RITIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRANSMISSION TO THE ASSESSEE ON 30.03.20 15. THEREFORE, THE NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT IN THIS C ASE IS VALID AND CONSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S. 147 OF THE ACT HAS TO BE HELD AS VALID. 25. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, SUBM ITTED THAT WHEN THE NOTICE U/S. 148 IS DATED 31.03.2015, HOW C OULD IT BE DELIVERED TO THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES ON 30.03.2015 F OR THE PURPOSE OF TRANSMISSION TO THE ASSESSEE. ON THIS ASPECT, W E HAVE SEEN THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 148 OF THE ACT INSOFAR AS TH IS ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED AND WE FIND THAT THE NOTICE THOUGH IS DAT ED 31.03.2015, IT HAS BEEN DESPATCHED TO THE DESPATCH SECTION ON 3 0.03.2015. THUS, IT IS CLEARLY A CASE OF A WRONG MENTIONING OF THE DATE IN THE NOTICE U/S. 148 AND BEYOND THIS, NO OTHER ADVERSE I NFERENCE CAN BE DRAWN IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. WE, THEREFORE, FIND NO MERIT IN THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AND TH E SAME IS DISMISSED. 3. IN THIS MP, THE ASSESSEE HAS POINTED OUT AS FOLL OWS:- 2.1. THE PETITIONER DRAWS THE KIND ATTENTION OF THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL TO PAGE NO. 48 OF THE PAPER BOOK 2 FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT WHERE THE DISPATCH CLERK HAS ACKNOWLEDGE D THAT THE NOTICE HAS BEEN DISPATCHED ON 31.03.2015. HOWEVER, THE DISPATCH REGISTER SHOWS THE DATE OF DISPATCH AS 30.03.2015. THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE PRESUMED THAT THE NOTICE DATED 31.03.2015 HAS TO BE MP NO.46/BANG/2019 PAGE 3 OF 4 30.03.2015 AND IT HAS BEEN DISPATCHED ON 30.03.2015 ITSELF BECAUSE BOTH THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DISPATCH CLERK CANNOT COMMIT THE SAME MISTAKE STATING 31.03.2015. 2.2. IT IS ALSO CLEAR FROM THE PAGE NO. 05 OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE APPELLANT WHERE THE DATE OF BOOKING THE NOTI CE WITH THE POST OFFICE IS 01.04.2015 AT 06.23 PM THEREFORE, TH E NOTICE IS ISSUED BEYOND SIX YEARS AND IT IS TIME BARRED. 2.3. THE PETITIONER DRAWS THE ATTENTION OF THE HO N'BLE TRIBUNAL TO PAGE NO. 50 OF THE PAPER BOOK 2 FILED BY THE DEP ARTMENT. THERE IS A NOTING THERE AS UNDER; DURING THE HEARING, THE IMPORT OF THE ABOVE NOTING WAS NOT BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE 1TAT BY THE APPELLA NT. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE FIGURES '33' REPRESENT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF COVERS COLLECTED ON 01.04.2015 AND ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE INITIALS OF THE EMPLOYEE OF POSTAL DEPARTMENT. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT TO PR ODUCE THE POSTAL DESPATCH REGISTER FOR THE LAST WEEK OF MARCH 2015 AND FIRST WEEK OF APRIL 2015. THIS WOULD ENABLE THE HON'BLE T RIBUNAL TO FIND OUT WHETHER THE '33' POSTAL COVERS HANDED OVER ON 01.04.2015 INCLUDES THE COVER CONTAINING THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT BOTH ON 30 .03.2015 AND 31.03.2015 THERE IS NO INITIALS OF THE REPRESENTATI ON OF POSTAL DEPARTMENT ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF THE COVERS. HENCE, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, WHO REITERATED THE STAND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN T HE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION AS STATED ABOVE. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS WITHOUT ANY MERIT AND IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. T HE ADMITTED POSITION IS THAT THE EVIDENCE OF DESPATCH OF THE NOTICE U/S. 14 8 BY HANDING OVER TO THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES IS CLEARLY AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THIS PETITION, THE 33 INITIALS 01/04/2015 MP NO.46/BANG/2019 PAGE 4 OF 4 ASSESSEE SEEKS TO RELY ON SOME OTHER ENTRY IN THE O THER PART OF DESPATCH REGISTER AND WANTS TO MAKE ROVING AND FISHING ENQUI RY ON MATTERS WHICH ARE UNCONNECTED WITH THE ISSUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. I T MAY ALSO BE STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS SEEKING TO PUT FORTH A NEW PLEA AND INDIRECTLY SEEKING A REVIEW OF THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS NOT PERMISSIBLE FOR THE TRIBUNAL TO REVIEW ITS OWN ORDER IN EXERCISE OF POWERS U/S. 254(2) OF THE ACT. WE THEREFORE DISMIS S THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION AS DEVOID OF ANY MERIT. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 19 TH DAY OF JULY, 2019. SD/- SD/- ( JASON P. BOAZ ) ( N.V . VASU DEVAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT BANGALORE, DATED, THE 19 TH JULY, 2019. / D ESAI S MURTHY / COPY TO: 1. THE APP ELLANT 2. THE R ESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUA R D F ILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE.