Shreeji Developers, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT.,Circle-9, Ahmedabad

MA 65/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6772 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VINOD RANWANI
• Assessee Lawyers: D P SONI
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND A. K. GARODIA, AM) M. A. NO.65/AHD/2011 (IN MA NO.222/AHD/2010 - (IN IT (SS) A NO. 26/AHD/2008- BP-: 01-04-1985 TO 31-03-1995 AND 01-04-1995 TO 21 -09-1995) M/S. SHREEJI DEVELOPERS, B-1, SHYAM GOKUL APARTMENTS, SATELLITE, RING ROAD, AHMEDABAD VS THE D. C. I. T., CIRCLE-9, AHMEDABAD PA NO. ACWPB 0657 Q (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI D. P. SONI, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI VINOD RANWANI, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 26-08-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 26-08-2011 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI : THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE MISC. APPLICATION NO.222/AHD/2010 AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED IN IT (SS) A NO. 26/AHD/2008 DATED 10-08-2 010. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOW PREFERRED THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED DATED 08-04-2011 DISMISSIN G THE EARLIER MISC. APPLICATION NO. 222/AHD/2010. THEREFORE, SAME WAS NOT MAINTAINABLE AS NO MISC. APPLICATION LIES AGAINST M ISC. APPLICATION ORDER. 3. THE HONBLE ORISSA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT AND ANOTHER VS INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND ANOTHER, 196 I TR 838 HELD AS UNDER: MA NO.65/AHD/2011 (IN MA NO.222/AHD2010 IN IT (SSA) NO.26/AHD/2008) M/S. SHREEJI DEVELOPERS VS DCIT, CIRCLE-9, AHMEDABA D 2 SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, EMPOWE RS THE TRIBUNAL TO AMEND ANY ORDER PASSED BY IT UNDER SUB- SECTION (1) WITH A VIEW TO RECTIFYING ANY MISTAKE A PPARENT FROM THE RECORD AT ANY TIME WITHIN FOUR YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER. THEREFORE, TO ATTRACT THE APPLICABILI TY OF SECTION 254(2), THE MISTAKE WHICH IS SOUGHT TO BE R ECTIFIED MUST BE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD, AND THE SAME MUST BE IN ANY ORDER PASSED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTIO N 254. AN ORDER REJECTING AN APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 254(2) IS NOT AN ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 254(1) AND IT CANNOT BE RECTIFIED UNDER SECTION 254 (2). 4. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SEEKS PERMI SSION TO WITHDRAW THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION WITH LIBERTY TO FILE FRESH MISC. APPLICATION AGAINST THE MAIN ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATI ON IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN WITH LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSEE TO MOVE P ROPER MISC. APPLICATION, IF SO ADVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSE SSEE IS DISMISSED AS NOT BEING PRESSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26-08-2011 SD/- SD/- (A. K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER LAKSHMIKANT/- MA NO.65/AHD/2011 (IN MA NO.222/AHD2010 IN IT (SSA) NO.26/AHD/2008) M/S. SHREEJI DEVELOPERS VS DCIT, CIRCLE-9, AHMEDABA D 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD