ITO, New Delhi V. Puneet Saluja, New Delhi

MA 474/DEL/2019

AI Insights

The case involves an application for rectification filed by the Revenue against an appellate order dated 05.12.2018 concerning multiple assessment years. The Revenue contended that the assessment year 2009-10 was not mentioned in the heading of the order and that only five out of six appeals were listed. The Tribunal reviewed the original order and found that the assessment year was indeed mentioned and all six appeals were listed. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's application, labeling it as misconceived and lacking proper application of mind.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 300703 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 15-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 02-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No.474/Del/2019 [Arising out of ITA No.821/Del/2014] Assessment Year: 2006-07 Income Tax Officer, New Delhi Vs. Sh. Puneet Saluja, C/o. M/s. Malik & Co., 305/7, Thapar Nagar, Meerut PAN :AIGPS2924P (Applicant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, V.P.: Captioned application has been filed by the Revenue seeking rectification in order dated 05.12.2018 passed in ITA No. 821/Del/2014; 3074, 3822 & 3735/Del/2013; 1010 & 3711/Del/2015. Applicant by Ms. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR Respondent by None Date of hearing 16.06.2023 Date of pronouncement 10.07.2023 M.A. No.474/Del/2019 AY: 2006-07 2 | P a g e 2. We have heard the parties and perused the materials on record. It is the case of the Revenue that in the consolidated appellate order dated 05.12.2018 passed by the Tribunal, ‘assessment year 2009-10’ has not been mentioned in the heading of the order. Further, the Revenue has contended that, though, in para 5 of the appellate order, it is mentioned that six appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed, however, numbers of only five appeals have been mentioned. 3. On a careful perusal of the appellate order passed by the Tribunal, we find, the purported mistakes sought to be rectified by the Revenue to be non-existent. In the heading of the appeal order, the ‘assessment year 2009-10’ has been clearly mentioned. Even, in the first paragraph of the order, assessment years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 have been mentioned. 4. Further, in the heading/cause title of the appellate order, numbers relating to six appeals have been clearly mentioned. 5. That being the factual position emerging on record, the present application of the Revenue appears to be wholly misconceived and without proper application of mind. Accordingly, we dismiss the present application. M.A. No.474/Del/2019 AY: 2006-07 3 | P a g e 6. In the result, the miscellaneous application is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 10 th July, 2023 Sd/- Sd/- (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Dated: 10 th July, 2023. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi