1 M.A. NO. 07/NAG/2016. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER.. M.A. NO. 07/NAG/2016. (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 180/NAG/2010) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 5 - 06. VIDARBHA VENEER INDUSTRIES, THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER, (IN LIQUIDATION), NAGPUR. VS. WARD - 7(1), NAGPUR. PAN AAAACV5461H. APPLICANT. RESPONDENT. APPLICANT BY : SHRI A.R. PIMPARKHEDE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.R. NINAWE. DATE OF HEARING : 24 - 03 - 2017. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 4 T H MARCH, 2017. O R D E R. PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A. M. : BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE SEEKS RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 180/NAG/2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 VIDE ORDER DATED 18 - 12 - 2015. 2. IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE HAS A G I T A T E D THAT IN GROUND NO. 1 PERTAINING TO LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN, PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C WERE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE LEASEHOLD RIGHTS IN THE LAND. IN THIS REGARD THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL HAS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE COMPILATION THE ASSESSEE HAS REFERRED TO MUMBAI ITAT DECI SION IN THE CASE OF ATUL G. PURANIK VS. ITO WHICH HAS BEEN IGNORED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THIS ORDER. 3. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WE FIND THAT THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE PERTAINING TO THIS ISSUE IN GROUND NO. 1 READ AS UNDER : 2 M.A. NO. 07/NAG/2016. (1) THAT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN THE LAW AND ON FACTS IN DETERMINING LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF PLOTS BY TAKING STAMP DUTY PRICE AND HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE SALE CONSIDERATION AND REGISTERED VALUERS VALUATION AND THE LEARNED C IT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONSIDERING THE VALUATION OFFICERS VALUATION FOR RS. 1,80,88,560/ - AS AGAINST STAMP DUTY PRICE TAKEN BY ASSESSING OFFICER AT RS. 2,61,22 , 000/ - . ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE AUTHORITIES SHOULD HAVE TAKEN IN TO CONSIDERATION THE REGISTERED VALUERS VALUATION BY TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE ACTION IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 4. WE FIND THAT IN THIS GROUND OF APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS NO WHERE CONTESTED THAT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C WERE NOT APPLICABLE ON LEASEHOLD PROPERTIES. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD IN NOT ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE WHICH HAS NOT BEEN R AISED BY WAY OF GROUNDS OF APPEAL. LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE CONCEDED THAT THERE IS NO SUCH MENTION IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND THAT GROUNDS OF APPEAL WERE DRAFTED BY EARLIER COUNSEL. HENCE IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARE NT FROM RECORD IN THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. HENCE WE DISMISS THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 2 4 T H DAY OF MARCH, 2017. S D / - S D / - (RAM LAL NEGI) ( SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER. ACOUNTANT MEMBER. NAGPUR, DATED: 2 4 T H MAR CH, 2017. 3 M.A. NO. 07/NAG/2016. COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. VIDARBHA VENEER INDUSTRIES LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION), C/O A.G. PIMPARKHEDE & CO., C.A., M - 2, SANKET APARTMENT, KHRE TOWN, DHARAMPETH, NAGPUR - 10. 2. I.T.O., WARD - 7(1), NAGPUR. 3. CIT(APPEALS) - I I, NAGPUR. 4. C.I.T. - , NAGPUR. 5. D.R., ITAT, NAGPUR. 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WAKODE.