Ravi Maheshwari, Meerut V. DCIT, Circle- 2, Meerut

MA 767/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7886 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M BARANWAL

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH FRIDAY, NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, M.A NO.767/DEL/2018 (IN ITA NO.52/DEL/2018) [A.Y 2009-10] RAVI MAHESHWARI VS. THE D.C.I.T. 210, WEST END ROAD, CIRCLE-2 MEERUT MEERUT PAN NO.AATPM3043N [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] DATE OF HEARING : 02.09.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.09.2021 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ROHIT AGGARWAL, C A REVENUE BY : SHRI M. BARANWAL, SR. DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE IS D IRECTED TOWARDS THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.52/DEL/ 2018 DATED 12.11.2018. 2 2. THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT THE FOLLOWING ADDITIO NAL GROUND REMAINED TO BE ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBUNAL :- THAT THE PENALTY ORDER AS PASSED BY THE LD. A.O. I S ILLEGAL AND DESERVES TO BE ANNULLED AS THE PENALTY SHOW CAU SE NOTICES DATED 17.11.2016 AND 15.05.2017, ISSUED BY HIM WERE NON- SPECIFIC AND DID NOT SPECIFY AS TO UNDER WHICH LIMB OF SECTION 271 (1) (C) OF THE IT ACT, 1961, THE PENALTY WAS SO UGHT TO BE LEVIED UPON THE APPELLANT. 3. BEFORE ME THE COUNSEL POINTED OUT THAT IN THE WR ITTEN SYNOPSIS AT PARA-9 THE ASSESSEE HAS REFERRED TO THE AFOREMENTIO NED ADDITIONAL GROUND. THE COUNSEL PLEADS THAT SINCE THE ADDITIONA L GROUND HAS REMAINED UN-ADJUDICATED THE ORDER SHOULD BE RECALLE D FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 4. PER CONTRA THE DR STRONGLY STATED THAT THERE IS NO ERROR OR INFIRMITY IN THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL. 5. I HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE M ISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. IT IS TRUE THAT THE ADDITIONAL GROUND WAS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS EQUALLY TRUE THAT IN THE WRITTEN SY NOPSIS THERE IS REFERENCE TO THE ADDITIONAL GROUND. 3 6. HOWEVER, IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION ONCE THE APPEA L HAS BEEN DECIDED ALL MERITS PLEADINGS HAVE BEEN DULY CONSIDE RED AND ANY FRESH ADJUDICATION WOULD AMOUNT TO REVIEW OF THE ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL. I, THEREFORE, DISMISS THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION B Y THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.09. 2021 IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE RIVAL REPRESENTATIVES. SD/- [N.K. BILLAIYA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 02.09.2021 *NEHA* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI 4 DATE OF DICTATION 0 2 .09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 0 2 .09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER 0 2 .09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 0 2 .09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 0 2 .09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.PS/PS 0 2 .09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT 0 2 .09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER