ITO, Ward- 1(4), Faridabad V. Kashi Ram, Faridabad

MA 766/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9829 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-06-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAKASH DUBEY
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 201; 254(2); 147

Judgement Text

IN TH E INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : FRIDAY : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 766 /DEL/20 1 9 ITA NO. 6451 /DEL/201 8 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 10 - 11 ITO, WARD - 1( 4 ), FARIDABAD. VS KASHI RAM, RRA TAXIN DIA, D - 28, SOUTH EXTN., PART I, NEW DELHI 110 049. PAN: CTCPR4822E (APP LICA NT ) (RESPONDENT) A SSESSEE BY : SHRI RAKESH GUPTA, ADVOCATE, SHRI SOMIL AGGARWAL, ADVOCATE & SHRI DEEPESH GARG, ADVOCATE RE VENUE BY : SHRI PRAKASH DUBEY, SR. D R DATE OF HEARING : 1 1 . 0 6 . 20 21 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11 . 0 6 . 201 9 ORDER PER R. K. PANDA, AM : TH E REVENUE, THROUGH TH IS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION , REQUESTS THE TRIBUNAL FOR RECALL OF ITS ORDER ON THE GROUND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS DE CIDED THE APPEAL ON ERRONEOUS FACTS AND LAW. 2. THE LD. DR, REFERRING TO THE CONTENTS OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, DREW THE ATTENTION OF THE BENCH TO THE SAME WHICH READS AS UNDER: - MA NO. 766 / DEL/201 9 2 IN THE MATTER OF : MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF SH. KASHI RAM S/O SH. RAM PARSHAD, DU - 86, WARD NO.21, PANCHWATI COLONY, NEAR SOORDAS MANDIR, PALWAL (HARYANA), ITA NO. 6451/DEL/2018 DATED 16.04.2019. IT IS MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED AS UNDER: 1. THE ABOVE APPEAL WAS DISPOSED OFF AND QUASHED THE REASSESSME NT ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL BY ITS ORDER DATED 16.04.2019 HOLDING THAT APPROVAL WAS GRANTED BY THE PR. CIT, FARIDABAD BY NOTING APPROVED SHOWS THAT THE APPROVAL WAS GIVEN IN MECHANICAL MANNER WITHOUT RECORDING PROPER SATISFACTION AFTER DUE APPLICATION OF MI ND. 2. HON BLE ITAT HAS PARTLY ACCEPTED THE NOTE MADE BY THE PR. CIT ON THE PROPOSAL FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE ACT AS ANUMODDIT (APPROVED) ONLY WHEREAS COMPLETE NOTE WAS WRITTEN AS MAI SANTUSHTH HOON KI YAH CASE DHARA 148 KE ADHIN NO TICE JAARI KARNE KE LIYE UPYUKT HAI - ANUMODDIT - SIGNATURE - 25/03/17 . THEREFORE THE JUDGEMENT ON WHICH THE HON BLE ITAT RELIED UPON I.E. THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PR. CIT VS. N.C. CABLES LTD. (SUPRA) DIFFER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANC ES OF THE PRESENT CASE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE MISTAKE OF IGNORING THE COMPLETE SATISFACTORY NOTE MADE BY THE PR. CIT, FARIDABAD MAY BE CONSIDERED AND M.A. FILED MAY KINDLY BE ACCEPTED TO RECONSIDER THE DECISION. 3. THE APPELLANT BEG THAT THE ORDER MAY BE RECALLED AND THE APPEAL MAY BE DECIDED. 3. REFERRING TO THE COPY OF THE SATISFACTION NOTED AT PARA 12 OF THE APPROVAL GIVEN U/S 151(1), HE DREW THE ATTENTION OF THE BENCH TO THE SAME WHEREIN THE C IT WHILE GIVING APPROVAL HAD MENTIONED THAT SHE IS SATISFIED THAT IT IS A FIT CASE FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148. HE ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE JUDGMENT RELIED ON BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF N.C CABLES LTD. (SUPRA) IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. HE ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT APPROPRIATE ORDER MAY BE PASSED FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. MA NO. 766 / DEL/201 9 3 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELYING ON VARIOUS DECISIONS, SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS RIGHTLY QUASHED TH E REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AFTER OBSERVING THAT THE LD.CIT HAD SIMPLY MENTIONED: I AM SATISFIED AND, THEREAFTER, HAS SIGNED. A PERUSAL OF THE COPY OF APPROVAL SHOWS THAT THE WORDS IN HINDI, THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF WHICH READS, I AM SATISFIED THAT I T IS A FIT CASE FOR REOPENING U/S 148 DOES NOT MEAN ANYTHING AND THE LD.CIT HAS TO GIVE IN THE BRIEFEST MANNER REGARDING THE REASONS FOR GIVING HER APPROVAL. HOWEVER, IN THE INSTANT CASE, NO SUCH REASON WAS GIVEN, THEREFORE, THE REVENUE, THROUGH THIS MI SCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS TRYING TO REQUEST THE TRIBUNAL TO MODIFY ITS ORDER WHICH AMOUNTS TO REVIEW OF ITS ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE IN LAW. HE ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE SHOULD BE DISMISSED. 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE RE CORD. A PERUSAL OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED ON VARIOUS DECISIONS WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT MERE APPENDING OF THE EXPRESSION APPROVED OR IT IS A FIT CASE FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 SAYS NOTHING AND THE CIT HAS TO RECORD ELABORATE REASONS FOR AGREEING WITH THE NOTE PUT UP AND AT THE SAME TIME SATISFACTION HAS TO BE RECORDED OF THE GIVEN CASE WHICH COULD BE REFLECTED IN THE BRIEFEST POSSIBLE MANNER. HOWEVER, IN THE INSTANT CASE, NO SUCH REASON HAS BEEN GIVEN BY THE CIT WHILE GIVING HER APPROVAL FOR REOPENING OF THE CASE. IN MY OPINION, THE REVENUE THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS MA NO. 766 / DEL/201 9 4 REQUESTING THE TRIBUNAL TO MODIFY ITS ORDER WHICH AMOUNTS TO REVIEW OF ITS ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE IN LAW. THE LD. DR COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY OTHER APPARENT ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, I HOLD THAT THERE IS NO APPARENT ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL SO AS TO INVOKE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE IT ACT. ACCORDINGLY, T HE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 6. I N THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FI LED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. TH E DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF, I.E., ON 11.06.2021. SD/ - ( R. K. PANDA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 11 TH J UNE, 2021. DK COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI