IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, PUNE . , , , BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM . / MA NO. 52 /PUN/201 8 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO . 797 /PUN/201 3 ) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 09 - 10 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), JALGAON ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. M/S. DHAVALAMRUT MILK TRADERS, HIRAPUR ROAD, DUDHSAGAR MARG, CHALISGAON, JALGAON 424101 PAN : AADFD8988P / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SUNIL GANOO REVENUE BY : MS. SHABANA PARVEEN / DATE OF HEARING : 30 - 11 - 2018 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27 - 0 2 - 2019 / ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM : TH IS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE U/S. 254(2) O F THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT ) SEEKING RECTIFICATION IN THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 31 - 10 - 2017 VIDE WHICH APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO . 797/PUN/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 09 - 10 WAS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE . 2 MA NO. 52/PUN/2018, A.Y. 2009 - 10 2. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED WITH A DELAY OF 46 DAYS. THE REVENUE HAS FILED A SEPARATE APPLICATION SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S. 254(2) OF THE ACT . 3. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(2) HAVE BEEN AMENDED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2016 W.E.F. 01 - 06 - 2016. AFTER AMENDMENT, SUB - SECTION (2) OF SECTION 254 READS AS UNDER : (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 B Y IT UNDER SUB - SECTION (1), AND SHALL MAKE SUCH AMENDMENT IF THE MISTAKE IS BROUGHT TO ITS NOTICE BY THE ASSESSEE OR THE [ASSESSING] OFFICER: 4. AS PER THE AMENDMENT THE APPLICATION SEEKING RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD HAS TO BE FILED WITHIN 6 MONTHS FROM THE END OF THE MONTH IN WHICH THE ORDER SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED WAS PASSED. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE TRIBUNAL ORDER SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED WAS PASSED ON 31 - 10 - 2017. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S. 254(2) HAS BEEN FILED BY THE DEPAR TMENT ON 15 - 06 - 2018. THUS, THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE CLEARLY BEYOND THE PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS. 5. THE TRIBUNAL HAS NO POWER TO CONDONE DELAY IN FILING OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S. 254(2) OF THE ACT. IN THIS CONTEXT IT WOULD BE RELEVANT TO MENTION THE DECISION OF HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RAJA MALWINDER SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. REPORTED AS 278 ITR 568 AND THE DECISION OF DELHI BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF RAHUL JEE & CO. (P) LTD. VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX REPORTED AS 120 ITD 481. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI KASTURILAL SARDARILAL LUTHRA VS. DY. 3 MA NO. 52/PUN/2018, A.Y. 2009 - 10 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IN MA NO. 38/PUN/2017 ARIS ING OUT OF ITA NO. 923/PUN/2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003 - 04 DECIDED ON 04 - 04 - 2018. THUS, IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND THE CASE LAWS DISCUSSED ABOVE, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE, BEING BARRED BY LIMITATION. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, T HE 27 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019. SD/ - SD/ - ( . /D. KARUNAKARA RAO ) ( / VIKAS AWASTHY) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE; / DATED : 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2019. RK / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 2, NASHIK 4. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 2, PUNE 5. , , , / DR, ITAT, A BENCH, PUNE. 6. / GUARD FILE. / / // TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / PRIVATE SECRETARY, , / ITAT, PUNE