Mahanth Designers Private Limited, , Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officers , Ward-16(3), Hyderabad

MA 72/Hyd/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6843 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-12-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 30-09-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y V S T SAI
• Assessee Lawyers: SIVA PRASAD
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SH RI SAT B EER S INGH GO DA RA , JU DI CIA L MEMBE R AND SHR I L AXMI PR AS A D SAHU , AC COUNT ANT MEMBE R M.A.No. 72/Hyd/2021 (in ITA No. 1561/Hyd/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mahanth Designers Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN – AAJCM 7344M Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward – 16(3), Hyderabad. (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Siva Prasad Revenue by: Shri YVST Sai,CIT-DR Date of hearing: 26/11/2021 Date of pronouncement: 07/12/2021 O R D E R PER L. P. SAHU, A.M.: This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the assessee u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act seeking rectification/modification of the order of the Tribunal dated 08/04/2021 in ITA No. 1561/Hyd/2019. 2. In the MA, the assessee, inter-alia, stated the Tribunal directed the AO to estimate the net profit @ 8% of the gross M.A. No. 72/Hyd/2021 M/s Mahnath Designers Pvt. Ltd., , Hy d . :- 2 -: turnover, which is not proper under the then prevailing situations and market conditions and, therefore, requested to recall the order passed by the Tribunal dated 03/07/2019. 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the order passed by the ITAT. 4. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We observe that the Tribunal after considering the grounds raised in appeals, submissions made from both the sides and considering the documents available on record, passed the order. The Tribunal cannot review its own order in the garb of power vested u/s 254(2) of the Act. Therefore, recalling of the order in this case as sought by the Authorized Representative will tantamount to review of the order which is not permitted under the law. This power is not vested with the Tribunal. For this proposition, we rely on the decision of the ITAT, Mumbai Benches in the case of Gateway Terminals India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, [2021] 128 Taxmann.com 314 and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s Reliance Telecom Ltd., Civil Appeal Nos. 7110 & 7111 of 2021 vide order dated 3 rd December, 2021. Accordingly, we dismiss the MA filed by the assessee. M.A. No. 72/Hyd/2021 M/s Mahnath Designers Pvt. Ltd., , Hy d . :- 3 -: 5. In the result, MA filed by the assessee is dismissed in above terms. Pronounced in the open court on 7 th December, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S. GODARA) (L. P. SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 7 th December, 2021. kv copy to : 1 M/s Mahnath Designers Pvt. Ltd., H.No. 4-2-466/467, Badichowadi, Hyderabad. 2 ITO, Ward – 16(3), Hyderabad. 3 CIT(A) - 4, Hyderabad 4 Pr. CIT –4 , Hyderabad. 5 ITAT, DR, Hyderabad 6 Guard File.