D.N.Siva Prasad Chetty, Madanapalle V. ACIT, Cir -1, Tirupathi

MA 59/HYD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6609 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-05-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 16-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B V PRASAD REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: CHAITANYA KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B ', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AKBER BASHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.59/HYD/2011 (IN ITA NO.1204/HYD/05) : ASSTT. YEAR 1987-88 M.A.NO.60/HYD/2011 (IN ITA NO.1205/HYD/05) : ASSTT. YEAR 1988-89 M.A.NO.61/HYD/2011 (IN ITA NO.1206/HYD/05) : ASSTT. YEAR 1989-90 M.A.NO.62/HYD/2011 (IN ITA NO.1203/HYD/05) : ASSTT. YEAR 1986-87 SHRI D.N.SIVA PRASAD CHETTY, MADANAPALLE. ( PAN - AAACL 5895 R ) V/S. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE-I, TIRUPATI. (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI CHAITANYA KUMAR REVENUE BY : SHRI B.V.PRASAD REDDY O R D E R PER AKBER BASHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: BY THESE FOUR APPLICATIONS UNDER S.254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, THE ASSESSEE SEEKS RECTIFICATION OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 30.8.2010 IN ITA NOS.1203 TO 1206/HY D/2005 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1986-87 TO 1989-90, ON THE GROUND THAT CERTAIN MISTAKES APPARENT FROM RECORD HAVE CREPT INTO THE SAME. MA NO.59 TO 62/HYD /2011 (IN ITA NO.1203 TO 1206/HYD/05) SHRI D.N.SIVA PRASAD CHETTY, MADANAPALLE. 2 2. THE FIRST MISTAKE POINTED OUT BY THE APPLICANT- ASSESSEE BY THE PRESENT APPLICATION IS THAT THE RESPONDENTS ARE INC ORRECTLY SHOWN IN THE CAUSE-TITLE OF OUR ORDER DATED 30.8.2010 AS ACIT CIR.10(1), CIR.1, RANGE-8, HYDERABAD , WHEREAS IT SHOULD BE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, TIRUPATI . WE FIND MERIT IN THE CONTENTION OF THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE IN THIS BE HALF, AND ACCORDINGLY RECTIFYING THE MISTAKE IN THE CAUSE-TITLE OF OUR OR DER DATED 30.8.2010, WE DIRECT THAT AGAINST THE RESPONDENT, THE FOLLOWING S HOULD BE READ- ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE-I, TIRUP ATI. (RESPONDENT) 3. THE NEXT MISTAKE POINTED OUT BY THE APPLICANT-A SSESSEE BY THE PRESENT APPLICATION IS THAT IN THE FIRST SENTENCE O F THE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 30.8.2010, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), TIRUPATI, AGAIN ST WHICH THE CONCERNED APPEALS WERE FILED WAS NOTED AS OF 25.8.2004, WHERE AS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTED AS OF 21.07.2005. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE FORM OF APPEAL AND OTHER MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND MERIT IN THIS CONTENTION OF THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE. WHILE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 25.8.2004 ERRONEOUSLY MENTIONED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER DATED 30.8.2010, DISPOSED OFF THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE, BY THE S UBSEQUENT ORDER DATED 21.07.2005, THE CIT(A) TIRUPATI DISPOSED OFF THE PE TITION OF THE ASSESSEE SEEKING RECTIFICATION OF THE CIT(A)S EARLIER ORDER DATED 25.8.2004 UNDER S.154 OF THE ACT. SINCE IT IS CLEAR FROM THE FORM OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND OTHER MATERIAL ON RECORD AN D THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ALSO CLEARLY INDICATE THAT THE RELEVANT APPEALS, VI Z. ITA NOS.1203 TO 1206/HYD/2005 WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 21.07.2005 PASSED UNDER S.154, AND NOT AGAIN ST THE EARLIER ORDER MA NO.59 TO 62/HYD /2011 (IN ITA NO.1203 TO 1206/HYD/05) SHRI D.N.SIVA PRASAD CHETTY, MADANAPALLE. 3 DATED 25.8.2004, THERE WAS INDEED A MISTAKE AS POIN TED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE, IN THE OPENING SENTENCE OF OUR ORDER DATE D 30.8.2010 IN IDENTIFYING THE ORDER APPEALED AGAINST. WE ACCORDI NGLY RECTIFY THE OPENING PART OF THE FIRST SENTENCE AND DIRECT THAT IT SHOUL D BE READ AS FOLLOWS- THESE FOUR APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), TIRUPATI DATED 21.07.2005 .. 4. THE NEXT GROUND ON WHICH THE APPLICANT-ASSESSE E SEEKS RECTIFICATION OF OUR ORDER DATED 30.8.2010 IS THAT THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) NEEDS RECTIFICATION AS SUCH ORDER WAS NOT PASSED WITHIN SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATI ON, BY THE TRIBUNAL DID NOT DISPOSE OFF SUCH GROUND BEFORE SETTING ASIDE TH E APPEAL. 5. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE MATTER, WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL, CONSIDERING ONE OF THE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE, WHE REBY IT WAS ALLEGED THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT GIVEN BY THE CIT(A) BEFORE PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER, HAS SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FIL E OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION OF THE MATTER BY HIM IN ACCORDANCE WI TH LAW. HAVING SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THAT COUNT, AND RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION, THE TRIBUNAL DI D NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO GO INTO THE OTHER CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSE E IN ITS APPEALS. WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSE E IN THE PRESENT PETITION ON THIS ASPECT. WE ACCORDINGLY REJECT THE CONTENT IONS OF THE APPLICANT- ASSESSEE ON THIS ASPECT. MA NO.59 TO 62/HYD /2011 (IN ITA NO.1203 TO 1206/HYD/05) SHRI D.N.SIVA PRASAD CHETTY, MADANAPALLE. 4 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE FOUR MISCELLANEOUS APPLI CATIONS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 8 TH JULY, 2011 SD/- SD/- (G.C.GUPTA) (AKBER BASHA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT/- 8TH JULY, 2011 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI D.N.SIVA PRASAD CHETTY, 14 - 227., EAST KOTHAPEETA, MADANAPALLE, CHITTUR DISTRICT. 2. ASST . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 1, TIRUAPTI 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS), TIRUPATI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, TIRUPATI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD. B.V.S.