PRATIMA H MEHTA, V. ASST CIT CIR 23,

MA 6/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3282 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 08-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P DANIEL

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO. 06/MUM/2015 ARISING OUT OF I .T.A. NO . 4288 /MUM/ 2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1993 - 94 PRATIMA H. MEHTA, 32,MADHULI, DR. A.B. ROAD, WORLI, MUMBAI - 400 018 / VS. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 23, MUMBAI ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ABNPM 8226G ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APP LICANT BY: SHRI DHARMESH SHAH / RESPONDENT BY : DR. P. DANIEL / DATE OF HEARING : 0 5 . 0 6 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 0 5 .0 6 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 4288/M/12 DT. 5.9.2014. 2. BY THIS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PARA - 22 ON PAGE 9 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND POINTED OUT THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF SHRI HITESH S. MEHTA FOR A.Y. 1993 - M.A. NO. 06/M/2015 2 94 IN ITA NO. 5138/M/03. IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT IN THE ORDER FOLLOWED BY THE TRIBUNAL, THE TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN ENQUIRIES. HOWEVER, WHILE DECIDING THE MATT ER, THE TRIBUNAL IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS DELETED THE ADDITION. SINCE THIS MISTAKE IS APPARENT, IT NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED. 3. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE CONTENTS OF THE APPLICATION VIS - - VIS ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE OR DER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOWED IN THIS CASE. WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL. WE, ACCORDINGLY RECTIFY THE MISTAKE IN PARA - 22 ON PAGE - 9 FROM THE 7 TH LINE , WHICH READ AS UNDER: WE FIND THAT ON IDENTICAL FACTS IN THE CASE OF SHRI HITESH MEHTA, THE ADDITIONS WERE SET ASIDE THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN ENQUIRIES. 4. WITH THIS DIRECTION, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. OR DER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 5 TH JUNE , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( SANJAY GARG ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 5 TH JUNE , 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS M.A. NO. 06/M/2015 3 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI