DCIT, V. Sri Satpal Sachdev,

MA 6/RAN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2634 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

1 MA NO.06/RAN/13 SH.SATPAL SACHDEV INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CIRCUIT BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI H.L. KARWA, PRESIDENT , AND HON'BLE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 0 6 /RAN/ 14 [ ARISING OUT OF IT A NO. 23 /RAN/10 ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 9 - 10 ] DCIT,C IR - 1,JSR VS. SHRI SATPAL SACHDEV, JSR ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) FOR THE APPLICANT : : SHRI DEEPAK ROSHAN, SR.S.C/LD.DR FOR THE ASSESSEE : SHRI S.K.PODDAR & M.K.CHOUDHARY, LDARS DATE OF HEARING : 05 - 12 - 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05 - 12 - 14 O R D E R SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THE REVENUE HAS FILED THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION SEEKING REC ALL OF THE ORDER DATED 01 - 05 - 2013 PASSED BY THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH IN ITA NO.23/RAN/2013 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10. 2. IN THE PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE, IT IS STATED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS PASSED A NON - SPEAKING ORDER AND ALSO DID NOT DEA L WITH THE BASIS ON WHICH THE LD CIT(A) HAD RENDERED HIS DECISION. IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT THE TRIBUNAL DID NOT DISCUSS ABOUT THE MERITS OF THE ADDITION. ACCORDINGLY IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PE RUSED THE RECORD. THE CONTENTIONS MADE BY THE REVENUE IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, WHICH IS DISCUSSED IN THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPH, WOULD SHOW THAT THE REVENUE IS SEEKING THE 2 MA NO.06/RAN/13 SH.SATPAL SACHDEV TRIBUNAL TO REVIEW THE IMPUGNED ORDER, BY RECALLING THE SAME. IT IS WELL ESTABL ISHED THAT THE TRIBUNAL DOES NOT HAVE POWER TO REVIEW ITS ORDER U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT. IN THE PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE, NO ERROR APPARENT FROM THE RECORD HAS BEEN POINTED OUT. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE UNABLE TO ENTERTAIN THIS PETITION. 4. IN THE RES ULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05 - 12 - 2014 SD/ - SD/ - [ H.L. KARWA ] [ B.R. BASKARA N ] PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 05 - 12 - - 2014 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPLICANT : 2 RESPONDENT : I 3 . CIT, 4 . CIT(A), 5 . DR, ITAT, RANCHI **PP/SPS / TRUE COPY] BY ORDER, ASSTT REGISTRAR. 3 MA NO.06/RAN/13 SH.SATPAL SACHDEV 1. DATE OF DICTATION ...... MA PREPARED BY HON'BLE. MEMBER ..................... 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER ........ ................OTHER MEMBER ....... 05 - 12 - 2014........................ 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S. ..................... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT............. .....................2 8 - 11 - 2014................................................... 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S ................ 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK ....................................... 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ......................................... 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER ............................................................................... .................. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER .............................................................. 4 MA NO.06/RAN/13 SH.SATPAL SACHDEV