Renukaben D. Patel, Ahmedabad V. ITO Ward-3(2)(4), Ahmedabad

MA 49/AHD/2020

AI Insights

This case involves a Miscellaneous Application (M.A. No.49/Ahd/2020) filed by Renuka D. Patel against the Income Tax Officer, concerning the assessment year 2012-13. The application was in response to an earlier Tribunal order dated 15.07.2019, which the assessee contended contained mistakes regarding the acknowledgment of her income tax return filing and the procedural requirements under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal, after reviewing the application and the cited precedents, including a Supreme Court decision, concluded that there were no apparent mistakes in the original order and dismissed the application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 129872 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 17-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-12-2022
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2020
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Laxmandas Khandelwal
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 148; 143(2)

Judgement Text

M.A. No.49/Ahd/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No.49/Ahd/2020 (In ITA No.2115/Ahd/2017) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Renuka D. Patel vs. Income Tax Officer, C/o. Umesh B. Brahmbhatt Ward – 3(2)(4), Ahmedabad. 5, Bhagyodaya Flats, Sattar Taluka Society, Nr. C.U. Shah College, Navjivan, Ahmedabad - 380 015. [PAN – AMYPP 1774 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 23.12.2022 Date of pronouncement : 18.01.2023 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the assessee in respect of order dated 15.07.2019 passed by the Tribunal. 2. At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite giving several notices and the acknowledgement card issued by the Postal Authorities with respect to acknowledgement of the assessee is there on record. Thus, service is completed and hence we are taking up the matter for hearing on the basis of the Miscellaneous Application and the contentions therein taken by the assessee. The Miscellaneous Application states as under :- M.A. No.49/Ahd/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 2 of 4 “The Applicant submits that the Additional Ground raised before Your Honours in respect of non issue of notice u/s 143(2) is covered by the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of: CIT v/s Laxmandas Khandelwal - (2019) 310 CTR (S.C.) 8. (Copy of the Order is annexed for ready reference) The Applicant had during the course of Appeal hearing relied on the decisions of the Honourable Gujarat, Delhi and Allahabad High Courts. That coupled with the above decisions, the Honourable Tribunal has itself taken a clear view and conceded in Para 8, page 4 of the Order as follows: 1. "....there is no dispute with regard to the proposition that if an assessee has filed return in response to notice under section 148 then the AO was duty bound to issue notice under section 143(2) for taking cognizance of such return........" 2. That the fact that the Return of Income was duly filed on 30-3-2013 is also accepted by the Honourable tribunal in para 6, page 4 of its Order. 3. That the fact that the Appellant had informed the Assessing Officer vide letter dt. 21-9-2016 to consider the Return of Income Originally filed be treated as one in response to notice under section 148 is also accepted by the Honourable Tribunal in para 8, page 5 of its Order. 4. That there is a mistake and a contradiction in the Order - acknowledging the filing of return of Income on one hand (Para 2 above) and at the same time, treating the same as not filed since it was deemed to be filed on 21-9-2016 on the other had (Para 8, centre of page 5 of the Order). 5. That there is a further mistake in holding that the Assessee had not filed her Return (para 8, page 5 of the Order) 6. That it is so evolved and derived from para 8, page 5 of the Order that once the AO has set the assessment machinery in motion, issuing a questionnaire u/s 142(1), he is absolved of his legal onus to issue notice u/s 143(2). 7. That on the basis of the letter dt. 21-9-2016, the AO has duly considered the Original Return of Income in the process of assessing the Appellant (Computation part on Page 4 of the Assessment Order, Page 47 of the Paper Book) and thus he is estopped from denying the fact of filing the return and for this reason also, the AO is bound to issue notice u/s 143(2). 8. That the decision based on the example given in para 8, page 5 of the Order is also a mistake since the example is based on the assumption that the Return is filed just two days before the limitation deadline whereas the Assessee has filed it much in advance, almost 3 months before the limitation date. M.A. No.49/Ahd/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 3 of 4 In view of the mistakes apparent on record as above and the case law of the Honourable Supreme Court cited herein, it is requested, in the interest of justice, to recall the Order allowing the Assessee's appeal and oblige. Sd/- Renukaben D. Patel” 3. The Ld. DR confirmed that the assessee is seeking review of the order and there is delay in filing the present MA. Therefore, the MA may be dismissed. 4. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused all the relevant material available on record. As relates to delay part, the assessee has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Laxmandas Khandelwal (2019) 180 DTR 313 (SC). The contention of the applicant that there is a mistake and contradiction in the order acknowledging filing of return of income on one hand appears to be not correct. Therefore, there is no mistake apparent on record and hence the present Miscellaneous Application does not sustain. 5 In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 18 th January, 2023 Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Accountant Member Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 18 th day of January, 2023 PBN/* Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File M.A. No.49/Ahd/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 4 of 4 By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad