Mr. H.Mohammed Ameen, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

MA 64/CHNY/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6878 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 19-08-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 12-03-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI B BENCH, CHENNAI. BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.P. NO. 64/MDS/2008 [IN I.T.A. NO. 2533/MDS/2006] ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-02 MR. H. MOHAMMED AMEEN, NEW NO.11, OLD. NO. 5, SAVARIMUTHU STREET, MANNADY, CHENNAI 600 001. [PAN: AAAPA6735A] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD VIII (2) CHENNAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 19.08.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19.08.2011 ORDER PER HARI OM MARATHA, J.M. THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, THE ASSESSEE SEEKS TO RECALL THE ORDER DATED 11.01.2008 PASSED IN RELATION TO THE ABOVE CA PTIONED APPEAL PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 RENDERED IN ITA NO. 253 3/MDS/2006. FOR READY REFERENCE, WE EXTRACT THE ENTIRE PRAYER PART OF THI S PETITION AS UNDER: PRAYER IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE PETITIONERS COUNSEL ON R ECORD HAD SOUGHT FOR AN ADJOURNMENT OF THE HEARING FIXED BEFORE THE BENCH 9 .1.2008 WHICH PRAYER WAS REJECTED AND THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED WITHOUT GRANT ING OPPORTUNITY OF EFFECTIVE HEARING. IT WAS THE CONTENTION OF THE PETITIONER TH AT THE GROUND NOS. 4 & 5 RAISED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WAS NOT CONSID ERED IN PROPER PERSPECTIVE. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE PETITIONER THAT THERE WAS NO SURRENDER OF INCOME AS CONCLUDED WITHOUT VERIFYING THE RECORDS AND ON THE CONTRARY I T WAS STATED THAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES INCLUDING DENIAL OF CROSS EXAMINATION HAD LED TO THE FURNISHING OF THE M.P M.P M.P M.P. NO. . NO. . NO. . NO.6 66 64 44 4/MDS/ /MDS/ /MDS/ /MDS/08 0808 08 2 LETTER DATED 30.. IT WAS THE CONTENTION OF THE PETI TIONER THAT THE GROUND NOS. 4 & 5 RAISED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WAS NOT CONSIDERED IN PROPER PERSPECTIVE. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE PETITIONER THAT THERE WAS NO SURRENDER OF INCOME AS CONCLUDED WITHOUT VERIFYING THE RECORDS A ND ON THE CONTRARY IT WAS STATED THAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES INCLUDING DENIAL OF CROSS EX AMINATION HAD LED TO THE FURNISHING OF THE LETTER DATED 30.3.2004. IN THIS R EGARD, THE BENCH HAD NOT ADJUDICATED GROUND NO. 6 FORMING PART OF STATUTORY FORM NO. 36 AND AS A CONSEQUENCE THE PRESENT PETITION IS FILED TO RECALL THE EXPARTE ORDER PASSED. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER DATED 11 .1.2008 MAY BE RECALLED AND DECISION MAY BE RENDERED AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE O PPORTUNITY OF HEARING. DATED AT CHENNAI THIS THE 3 RD DAY OF MARCH, 2008. 2. THE PERUSAL OF THIS PETITION ITSELF SHOWS THAT THIS IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN TERMS OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AS THERE IS NO APPARENT RECTIFIABLE MISTAKE, WHICH CAN BE GATHERED EVEN FROM THE PLAIN READING O F THE SAME. THE PETITION AIMS AT REVIEW OF TRIBUNAL ORDER IN QUESTION, WHICH IS N OT PERMISSIBLE IN LAW. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS THIS PETITION. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION OF TH E ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19.08.2011. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (HARI OM MARATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 19.08.2011 VM/- TO: THE ASSESSEE//A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.