ITO 17(2)(1), MUMBAI V. ITD PRATIBHA CONSTRTIUM, MUMBAI

MA 689/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7254 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 27-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJNEESH YADAV LD
• Assessee Lawyers: MARGAV SHUKLA LD
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Set aside

Judgement Text

1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI , $ , & BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.689/MUM/2018 [ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO. 1925/MUM/2017] ( '(' '(' '(' '(' / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13) M/S. ITD PRATIBHA CONSORTIUM C/O. JAYESH SANGHRAJAKA & CO. LLP CHARTRED ACCOUNTANTS, UNIT NO.405 HIND RAJASTHAN CENTRE D.S. PHALKE ROAD, DADAR(E) MUMBAI-400 072. / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 17(2)(1) AAYKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI-400 020 ) ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. AAAAI-1654-D ( )+ /APPELLANT ) : ( ,-)+ / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MARGAV SHUKLA, LD. AR REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJNEESH YADAV, LD. DR ./ / DATE OF HEARING : 08/02/2019 0(./ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23/04/2019 / O R D E R PER MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER): - 1. BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR ASS ESSMENT YEAR [AY] 2012-13, THE ASSESSEE SEEKS RECTIFICATION / RECALL OF TRIBUNAL ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO. 1925/MUM/2017 DATED 10/08/2018. 2 2. DRAWING OUR ATTENTION TO THE PETITION, LD. AUTHO RIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR ASSESSEE [AR], SHRI MARGAV SHUKLA, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOUGHT PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES IN T HE SHAPE OF TENDER DOCUMENT DURING HEARING OF THE APPEAL IN VIEW OF TH E FACT THAT THE SAME COULD NOT BE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES AS TH E PROJECT WAS ALREADY COMPLETED BY THAT TIME AND DETAILS PERTAINING TO TH E SAME WERE NOT RECEIVED AT THE TIME OF MAKING OF SUBMISSIONS. THEREFORE, LD . AR SUBMITTED THAT A REQUEST WAS MADE TO SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FIL E OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. SINCE THE PRAYER OF ADMISSION OF ADDITIONA L EVIDENCES HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED WHILE ADJUDICATING THE MATTER, THE SAME CONSTITUTE MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. ANOTHER SUBMISSION MADE BY LD . AR IS THAT FACT THAT THE LOSS UNDER DISPUTE WAS ALTERNATIVELY ALLOWABLE AS BUSINESS LOSS U/S 28(IV) AGAINST WHICH A SPECIFIC GROUND NO. 3 WAS RA ISED IN THE APPEAL, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN ADJUDICATED. IN THE AFORESAID CIRCUMST ANCES, LD. AR PLEADED FOR SUITABLE RECTIFICATION / RECALL OF THE ORDER. T HE LD. DR OPPOSED THE SAME BY SUBMITTING THAT THE ORDER REQUIRES NO RECTIFICAT ION. 3. AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION AND PERUSAL OF RECOR DS, THE BENCH CONCURS WITH ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS ON BOTH COUNTS. THEREFO RE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE AFORESAID ORDER STANDS RECALLED. 4. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEAL IN R EGULAR HEARING BEFORE REGULAR BENCH AFTER DUE INTIMATION OF DATE OF HEARI NG TO RESPECTIVE PARTIES. 5. THE APPLICATION STANDS ALLOWED IN TERMS OF OUR A BOVE ORDER. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23/04/2019. SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) 1 11 1 / JUDICIAL MEMBER 1 11 1 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 3 1 MUMBAI; DATED : 23/04/2019 SR.PS:-JAISY VARGHESE / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. '#$ / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI.