Income Tax Officer,Ward-1, Kadapa V. Gopinath Kanduri , Kadapa

MA 7/Hyd/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5829 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 20-06-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 26-03-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ मŐ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA, G., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Miscellaneous ApplicaƟon No.7/Hyd/2024 आ.अपी.सं / ITA No. 219/Hyd/2022 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Kadapa Vs. Shri Gopinath Kanduri Kadapa [PAN : AEJPK9142E] अपीलाथŎ / Appellant Ů̝ यथŎ / Respondent िनधाŊįरती Ȫारा/Assessee by: Adv. S. Rama Rao राज̾ व Ȫारा/Revenue by: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 21 /06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement on: 11/07/2024 आदेश / ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Revenue filed this MA to recall the order dated 13/9/2023 on the ground that while allowing the appeal, the Bench relied upon certain affidavits filed by the buyers from the assessee staƟng that at the place where the sale took place no banking faciliƟes were available and that was the reason why the cash payments were made. In this MA Revenue contends that subsequent verificaƟon of the income tax returns filed by such buyers revealed that they in fact had bank accounts, the buyers who swore to wrong facts and therefore, the order needs to be recalled and the maƩer must be heard again on merits. Page 2 of 3 2. Ld. AR submiƩed that the affidavits were filed by the buyers long prior to the date of hearing in this maƩer and at least to 6 months elapsed thereaŌer before the maƩer was heard, Revenue did not verify the fact that the Ɵme and these facts were not available at the Ɵme of hearing of the appeal. Ld. AR submiƩed that since the Tribunal disposed of the maƩer basing on the material available on record as on the date, no new facts could be brought onto record to say that none consideraƟon of such new facts amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 3. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions. As rightly pointed out by the Ld. AR, the affidavits of the buyers were filed for months prior to the date of hearing in this maƩer and basing on the material available on record the appeal was disposed of. AdmiƩedly these facts were not available on record at the Ɵme when the maƩer was heard. So, none consideraƟon of the facts that are not available on record at the Ɵme of hearing does not amount to mistake apparent on record and does not consƟtute a reason to recall the order. Apart from this the facts now pleaded by the Revenue are verifiable facts and is not possible to conduct such enquiry in this MA. If the Revenue is of the opinion that the by the assessee or to wrong facts, the remedy of the Revenue is elsewhere, but not by way of this Miscellaneous ApplicaƟon to recall the order that was pronounced basing on the material available on record as on the date of hearing. With this view of the maƩer, we do not see any reason to hold that there is any mistake apparent on record to recall the order dated 13/9/2023. 4. MA is accordingly dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this the 11 th day of July, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (MANJUNAHA, G) (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 11/07/2024 Page 3 of 3 Pvv/SPS Copy forwarded to: 1. Income Tax Officer Ward -1 Kadapa 2. Shri Gopinath Kanduri, 1-441-17 Beside Lakshmi Towers, Maruthi Nagar, near RTC Bus Stand, Kadapa. 3. PCIT 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, HYDERABAD