The ITO, Dewas V. M/s Hind Syntax Ltd., Dewas

MA 84/IND/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8973 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 08-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: S S DESH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, J.M. AND SHRI R.C.SHARM A, A.M. PAN NO. : AAA CHY6203P M. A.NO . 84 /IND/201 2 . (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A.NO. 329/IND/2010) A.Y. : 200 5 - 06 INCOME - TAX OFFICER, DEWAS M/S.HIND SYNTEX, DEWAS VS APP LICANT RESPONDENT APP LICANT BY : S HRI R.A.VERMA, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.S.DESHPANDE, C. A. DATE OF HEARING : 03 .0 8 .2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06 . 0 8 .201 2 O R D E R PER R. C. SHARMA, A.M. THIS MISC. APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE REVENUE IN R ESPECT OF ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL DATED 18.08.2011 IN AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004- 05 & 2005-06. -: 2: - 2 2. THROUGH THIS PETITION, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT DELETI ON OF DISALLOWANCE BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN RESPECT OF FOUR I SSUES WERE RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, HOWEVER, WHILE DISPOSIN G THE APPEAL SEPARATE FINDING HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN BY TRIBU NAL ON EACH ISSUE. 3. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH MISC. PETITION AND THE ORDER O F THE TRIBUNAL DATED 18 TH AUGUST, 2011, WHEREIN TWO APPEALS OF REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 AND 2005-0 6 WAS DISPOSED AFTER CONSIDERING THE FOUR GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN RESPECT OF TWO YEARS 2004-05 & 2005-06. VIDE PARA 4 TO 18 AT PAGE NOS. 2 TO 8, THE TRIBUNAL HAVE DEAL T IN GREAT DETAIL IN RESPECT OF ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES MADE B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER, FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE LD.CIT(A) FOR THE DELETION AND THE CONCLUSION OF TRIBUNAL FOR CONFIRM ING THE FINDING OF CIT(A) FOR DELETION OF DISALLOWANCE/ADDI TIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO MIST AKE MUCH LESS AN APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUN AL IN SO FAR AS ALL THE FOUR GROUNDS RAISED IN BOTH THE YEARS HA VE BEEN EXHAUSTIVELY DEALT BY THE TRIBUNAL. THE POWERS OF T RIBUNAL U/S 254(2) IS CONFINED TO RECTIFYING THE MISTAKE APPARE NT FROM -: 3: - 3 RECORD AND THERE IS NO COURSE AVAILABLE U/S 254(2) TO CHANGE THE CONCLUSION, SO ARRIVED AT. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO N OT FIND ANY MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THUS, THE MIS C. APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH AUGUST, 2012. SD/ - SD/ - (JOGINDER SINGH) (R. C. SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 6 TH AUGUST, 2012. CPU* 668