Shri Dulichand Gole, Barwani V. The ACIT, 5(1), Indore

MA 8/IND/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6403 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 11-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.8/IND/2011 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.112/IND/2005) A.Y. 1996-97 DULICHAND GOLE VILLAGE PALSOOD DIST. BADWANI APPLICANT VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), INDORE RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI ASHISH GOYAL, CA RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES SEEKING RECALLING/RECTIFICATION OF THE OR DER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 28.1.2010. 2. DURING HEARING OF THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, WE HAVE HEARD MR. ASHISH GOYAL, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE CRU X OF ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS IDENTICAL TO THE SUBMISSI ONS AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL 2 AVAILABLE ON RECORD ALONG WITH THE IMPUGNED ORDER. WE FIND THAT GROUNDS NO.1 TO 2.3 OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL WERE N OT PRESSED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE MAIN APPEAL, THEREFORE, THE SAME WERE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. WE FURTHER FIND THAT IN GROUNDS NO.3 TO 3.2, THE SUBMISSIONS OF TH E ASSESSEE HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED WHEREIN THE GROUND RAISED I S THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT GIVING FULL CREDIT OF RS.2 LACS AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND FURTHER THE REMAINING CLAIM OF RS.50,000/- MAY KINDLY BE ACCEPTED. THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALREADY AL LOWED THE IMPUGNED GROUNDS (I.E. 3 TO 3.2) VIDE PARA 4 OF THE ORDER DATED 28.1.2010 IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE AMOUNT OF RS.50,000/-, AS PRAYED, HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE A SSESSEE. IT IS FURTHER SEEN EVEN THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE DISPOSING GR OUND NO.4 (PAGE 5 PARA 5) HAS DELIBERATED UPON THE ISSUE OF NON-ACCEP TANCE OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME WAS ES TIMATED AT RS.1,50,000/- WHEREAS THE TRIBUNAL ACCEPTED THE AGR ICULTURAL INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.2 LACS, AS AGITATED BY THE ASSESS EE, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION O F THE ASSESSEE SINCE IT HAS ALREADY BEEN ALLOWED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, CONSEQUENTLY, IN PRINCIPLE, THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE IMPUGNED OR DER WHICH REQUIRES ANY RECTIFICATION, HOWEVER, STILL WE HAVE CLARIFIED THE SAME. 3 FINALLY, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION OF THE ASSESSE ES IS DISPOSED OF IN TERMS INDICATED AS ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE H EARING ON THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION ON 6.5.2011. (R.C. SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 6.5.2011 !VYAS! COPY TO APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GU ARD FILE