DCIT CIR 3(3)(1), MUMBAI V. RAMA PHOSPHATES LTD, MUMBAI

MA 83/MUM/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8677 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANPREET SINGH DUGGAL
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Rectification of order

Judgement Text

INTHEINCOMETAX APPELLATETRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHDMUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIMYAHYA(ACCOUNTANTMEMBER)AND SHRI RAVISHSOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) MANO.83/MUM/2021 (ITANO.4007/MUM/2016) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 THEACIT-3(3)(1), ROOM NO. 609,6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K.ROAD, MUMBAI-400020. VS. M/S RAMAPHOSPHATES LTD., 812, RAHEJACHAMBERS, FREE PRESSJOURNAL MARG, NARIMANPOINT, MUMBAI-400021. PAN NO. AAACR5096C APPELLANT RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : MR. MANPREET SINGHDUGGAL, DR ASSESSEEBY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 16/07/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23/07/2021 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA,A.M. BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION (MA), THE ASSESSEE SEEKS RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ITA NO. 4007/M/2016FORASSESSMENT YEAR2011-12VIDEORDERDATED16.09.2019. THE ABOVE SAIDAPPEAL WAS BY REVENUE. NOW THE REVENUE HAS SUBMITTED ASUNDER: MANO. 83/MUM/2021 M/S RAMAPHOSPHATES LTD. 2 3. THE HON'BLE ITAT, IN ITS ORDER, HAS NEITHER DISCUSSED THE ISSUE NOR MADE ANY DECISION ON THE ISSUE OF BOGUS PURCHASES AMOUNTING TO RS.3,47,273/-. THE ISSUE HAS BEEN RAISED AS GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO. 3 FOR A.Y. 2011-12. THE HON'BLE ITAT DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE FOR A.Y. 2011-12 BY ADDRESSING THE ISSUES RAISED IN GROUNDS OFAPPEALNOS. LAND2ANDGROUNDMOS,3BEINGTHEISSUE OFBOGUSPURCHASES REMAINED UNATTENDED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.09.2019. THUS, THERE WAS NODISCUSSION ONTHEISSUES ONITSMERITS. 2. ON PERUSAL OF THE AFORESAID ITAT ORDER IT IS NOTED THAT IN THE COMBINED ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT FORASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11AND 2011-12FOLLOWING GROUNDSOFAPPEAL FORASSESSMENTYEAR2011-12WASDULYNOTEDTHAT: GROUNDNO.3 WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED INDELETINGTHEADDITIONOFRS.3,46,273/-ASBOGUSPURCHASEASTHEDIRECTOROFM/SMAA CHAMUNDA SALES PVT. LTD. HAS CONFIRMED BY FILING AFFIDAVIT BEFORE THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT THAT HE HAD NOT DONE ANY ACTUAL PURCHASE/SALES & ONLY BILLS WAS ISSUED WITHOUTACTUAL DELIVERY OFTHEMATERIAL. THIS GROUND HAS NOT BEEN ADJUDICATED IN THE SAID ORDER. HENCE, IT IS CORRECT SUBMISSION OF THE REVENUE THATITAT HASNOT ADJUDICATEDTHEAFORESAID GROUNDNO.3RELATING TO BOGUSPURCHASES. 3. HENCE, THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL.HENCE,WERECALL ITA NO.4007/M/2016FORASSESSMENTYEAR2011-12 ONLY TO ADJUDICATE GROUND NO. 3 RELATING TO BOGUS PURCHASES WHICH HAS REMAINED UN-ADJUDICATED. MANO. 83/MUM/2021 M/S RAMAPHOSPHATES LTD. 3 ACCORDINGLY, THE AFORESAID APPEAL IS RECALLEDONLYTO CONSIDERGROUNDNO. 3. REGISTRY DIRECTEDTO FIXTHE CASE FORHEARING IN THE NORMAL COURSE. 4. IN THE RESULT,THISMA STANDSALLOWED. ORDERPRONOUNCEDINTHEOPENCOURTON 23/07/2021. SD/- SD/- ( RAVISHSOOD ) ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANTMEMBER MUMBAI; DATED:23/07/2021 RAHUL SHARMA,SR. P.S. COPYOFTHEORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A) - 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT,MUMBAI 6. GUARDFILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT,MUMBAI