Swasthya Bikash samiti, Cuttack V. CIT Exemption, Hyderabad

MA 8/CTK/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2917 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 26-02-2024
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE MANISH AGARWAL Swastya Bikas Samiti, At: SCB Medical College & Hospital Compound, Mangalabad, Cuttack PAN/GIR No (Appellant Per Bench This is an dated 28.11.2023 2. Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena S.C.Mohanty, l IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.No.8/CTK/2024 (in ITA No.175/CTK/2023) Assessment Year : 2020-2021 Swastya Bikas Samiti, At: SCB Medical College & Hospital Compound, Mangalabad, Cuttack Vs. The CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad PAN/GIR No.AAEAS 5600 H (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR Date of Hearing : 19/0 Date of Pronouncement : 19/0 O R D E R This is an Misc. application filed by the assessee against the order dated 28.11.2023 of the Tribunal in ITA No.175/CTK/2023. Sandeep Kumar Jena, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr. DR appeared for the revenue. Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 23) 2021 (Exemption), Hyderabad Respondent) Kumar Jena, Adv : Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR 04/2024 /04/2024 filed by the assessee against the order Tribunal in ITA No.175/CTK/2023. d AR appeared for the assessee and Shri M.A.No.8/CTK/2024 (in ITA No.175/CTK/2023) Assessment Year : 2020-2021 Page2 | 3 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed on account of limitation on the ground that the condonation petition has been signed by the Advocate supported by affidavit filed by the appellant. It was the submission that this was the mistake on the part of the counsel and the counsel has corrected the same by filing a condonation petition with the proper signature of the appellant. It was the prayer that the order of the Tribunal may be recalled and the appeal disposed off on merits. 4. In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that there is no mistake in the order of the Tribunal and the mistake of the counsel though corrected would not lead to mistake in the order of the Tribunal. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the provisions of section 254(2) of the I.T.Act shows that the wording used is “with a view to rectify any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it under sub-section (1)”. Thus, what is required is that there should be a mistake apparent from the record of the Tribunal or in the order of the Tribunal. In the present case, when the appeal was disposed off, the delay condonation petition was not signed by the appellant and this mistake remains till the M.A.has been filed. Thus, it cannot be said that there is a mistake apparent from the record. This being so, M.A. filed by the assessee stands dismissed. M.A.No.8/CTK/2024 (in ITA No.175/CTK/2023) Assessment Year : 2020-2021 Page3 | 3 6. In the result, M.A. filed by the assessee stands dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 19/04/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 19/04/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Swastya Bikas Samiti, At: SCB Medical College & Hospital Compound, Mangalabad, Cuttack 2. The Respondent: The CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad 3. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 4. Guard file. //True Copy//