MP NO.67/VIZAG/2012 KODURU SURYA SUDHAKAR, VSKP PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MP NO.67/VIZAG/2012 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.33/VIZAG/2007) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 ACIT CIRCLE-3(1) VISAKHAPATNAM KODURU SURYA SUDHAKAR VISAKHAPATNAM (APPELLANT) PAN NO: AGMPK 8349M VS. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI S. RAVI SHANKAR NARAYAN, JCIT RESPONDENT BY: SHRI C.V.S. MURTHY, CA DATE OF HEARING: 09/11/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09/11/2012 ORDER PER SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS PETITION HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE, WHERE IN IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE ORDER PASSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED ABOVE IN ITA NO.33/VIZAG/2007 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 MAY BE RECONSIDERED. 2. SUPPORTING THE PETITION, THE LEARNED D.R SUB MITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL, VIDE PARAGRAPH 8 OF ITS ORDER DATED 31.3.2011 REFER RED (SUPRA) HAS DISPOSED OF THE GROUND RELATING TO THE ADDITION OF RATE DIFF ERENCE OF RS.3,75,229/-. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CONT EST THE SAID GROUND BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A), BUT HE RAISED THE SAME B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID GROUND COULD NOT BE RAISED BEFORE THE ITAT, AS IT WAS NOT CONTESTED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). HENCE , ADJUDICATION OF THE SAID ISSUE HAS RESULTED IN A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. ACCORDINGLY, HE PRAYED FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER REFERRED (SUPRA). 3. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LEARNED A.R SUBMITTED T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CONTESTED THE ENTIRE ADDITIONS BEFORE THE LEARNED C IT(A), WHICH FACT IS AVAILABLE IN THE PRAYER MADE IN THE GROUNDS OF APPE AL FILED BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT THE PRAYER TO GRANT RELI EF OF RS.35,78,139/- ALSO MP NO.67/VIZAG/2012 KODURU SURYA SUDHAKAR, VSKP PAGE 2 OF 2 INCLUDES THE IMPUGNED RATE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT OF RS. 3,75,229/-. ACCORDINGLY HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CONT ESTED THIS ISSUE BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A). HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIB UNAL DID NOT GRANT ANY RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AND IT HAS ONLY SET ASIDE TH E MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. ACCORDI NGLY HE SUBMITTED THAT NO PREJUDICE IS CAUSED TO THE DEPARTMENT BY THE ORDER PASSED BY HON'BLE ITAT. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND CARE FULLY PERUSED THE RECORD. THERE IS NO DISPUTE WITH REGARD TO THE FACT THAT TH E ASSESSEE DID RAISE A GROUND RELATING TO THE RATE DIFFERENCE IN THE APPEA L FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. AS POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED A.R, THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT RELIEF OF THE ENTIRE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN T HE APPEAL FILED BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A). ON THE STRENGTH OF THE SAID PRAYER ONLY, THE ASSESSEE SEEMS TO HAVE RAISED A GROUND ON THE IMPUGNED ISSUE . THUS WE DO NOT FIND MERIT IN THE CONTENTIONS MADE BY LEARNED D.R. IN A NY CASE, THE TRIBUNAL HAS ONLY SET ASIDE THIS MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE A SSESSING OFFICER. HENCE, AS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R, NO PREJUDICE IS CAUSED TO THE REVENUE IN RESPECT OF THIS ISSUE AND FURTHER NO PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVE D BY RECALLING THE ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND MERIT IN THE MISCELLANE OUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09-11-2012 SD/- SD/- (D. MANMOHAN) (B R BASKARAN) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VG/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM, DATE: 9 TH NOVEMBER, 2012 COPY TO 1 ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM 2 KODURU SURYA SUDHAKAR, VISAKHAPATNAM 2 CIT (CENTRAL), HYDERABAD 3 CIT(A)-I, HYDERABAD 5 THE DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 6 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM