DCIT, New Delhi V. Vasudeva Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

MA 759/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3851 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 23-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

1 M. A No. 759/Del/2019 in (ITA No. 4247/Del/2014 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER M. A NO. 759/Del/2019 (A.Y 2007-08) in I.T.A .No.4247/Del/2014 DCIT New Delhi (APPLICANT) vs Vasudeva Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. 2653, Vijay Plaza Building, Karol Bagh, New Delhi PAN: AABCV6233G (RESPONDENT) Applicant by Sh. Ved Jain, Adv and Sh. Ashish Goel, CA Respondent by Sh. Toufel Tahir, Sr. DR ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER: The present Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the Department seeking for recalling the order dated order dated 15/03/2019 in ITA No. 4247/Del/2014 for Ay 2007-08. 2. The Ld. DR submitted that, while deciding the appeal of the Revenue, this Tribunal should have directed to tax the undisclosed income in the AY 2008-09 which is mistake apparent from record. The Ld. DR has also relied on the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (ITAT) 1988 (40) taxmann 59(AMP) and also relied on the case of Honda SIEL Power Products Ltd. (2007) 165 taxman 307(SC). Date of Hearing 17.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement 21.06.2022 2 M. A No. 759/Del/2019 in (ITA No. 4247/Del/2014 3. Per contra, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Tribunal cannot give such direction prayed in the present Miscellaneous Application and scope u/s 254(2) of the Act is very limited. 4. We have heard the parties, verified the material on record and gave our thoughtful consideration. 5. In exercise of powers under section 254(2) of the Act, the Tribunal may amend any order passed by it only to rectify any mistake apparent from the record. The Tribunal cannot revisit its earlier order and go into detail on merit, which is beyond the scope and ambit of the power conferred under Section 254(2) of the Act. 6. The Department by way of the present Miscellaneous Application contended that the ‘the Tribunal should have directed to tax the undisclosed income in the AY 2008-09’ which is as per the Department is mistake apparent on record. We find difficult to agree with the contention of the Ld. DR. The issue involved in the ITA No. 4247/Del/2014 has been decided on merit and passed final order on 15/03/2019. There is a specific finding given on the issues involved in the Appeal after going through the material on record and the final order has been passed. In our opinion, ‘not giving direction to tax undisclosed income for the year 2008-09’ is not mistake apparent on record. The judgments relied by the Department is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, we find no merit in the present Miscellaneous Application. 3 M. A No. 759/Del/2019 in (ITA No. 4247/Del/2014 7. Accordingly, the miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 21 st June , 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI ) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.,) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 21 st June, 2022. R.N Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi 4 M. A No. 759/Del/2019 in (ITA No. 4247/Del/2014