Krishan Kumar, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

MA 856/DEL/2019

AI Insights

The case involves a Miscellaneous Application filed by Shri Krishan Kumar, the appellant, against the Income Tax Officer, Ward-26(3), New Delhi, concerning an earlier ITA decision. The appellant's counsel argued that the department had not provided reasons for the assessment, nor allowed inspection, which handicapped their ability to fully understand and contest the assessment. The Tribunal had previously disposed of the appeal without these reasons, leading to the filing of this MA. The Tribunal reviewed the MA and found that the issues raised were not within the scope of rectification under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, leading to the dismissal of the application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 116331 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 19-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 26-11-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member MA No. 856/Del/2019 (in ITA No. 139/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12) Shri Krishan Kumar, 98, Village and Post, Amberhai, Sector-19, Dwarka, New Delhi-110075 Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-26(3), New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AJIPK4441Q Assessee by : Sh. K. R. Manjani, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 20.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 16.03.2023 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: This Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the assessee arising out of the order in ITA No.139/Del/2016. 2. The relevant part of the MA is as under: “3. That on 10.07.2019 my counsel, on starting of hearing stated reasons had not been received nor has department allowed inspection, the Ld. DR may kindly be directed to supply reasons as per orders of Ld. Tribunal quoted above. The Hon’ble Bench observed that this is not their duty. On this counsel requested for adjournment but your honours directed that this appeal is disposed off today. Whatever arguments the counsel could make may be stated. Since the counsel was handicapped in absence of reasons and inspection not knowing full facts, he simply pressed that legal ground above invalidity and illegality of the assessment in view of judgments given in our letter dated 18.01.2019 may kindly be considered and order passed. (i) In Para 3 in the extract of CIT(A)’s order, it is stated that there are two wills. According to the transfer of properties which are not through registered deed, purchaser always takes copy of the will since mother of the appellant sold immovable MA No. 856/Del/2019 Krishan Kumar 2 property to two persons, it is on this account that there are two wills; it rather supports the sale of property by appellant’s mother. (ii) In Para 5 of the Ld. Tribunal’s order, it is stated that Ld. DR submitted that copy of reasons were supplied to the appellant, no proof for this was shown nor date is stated and this cannot be correct position otherwise appellant would not had sent 6 letters for reasons and inspection till 14.01.2019 as shown above in Para 2. (iii) It is wrongly stated that the judgments including that of Hon’ble Supreme Court are not applicable because reasons have been supplied to the appellant which is wrong, there being no proof for this. Since above mistakes are apparent from record and there is no proof for supply of reason by department to appellant, it is prayed that orders of the Ld. Tribunal may kindly be rectified suitably. Copy of the Tribunal order taken out by internet and copy of challan towards fee for this application are attached.” 3. On going through the MA, we find that the issue taken up in the MA is beyond the purview of Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act. Revision of the order in the guise of rectification cannot be allowed as per the established procedure and hence, the MA of the assessee is liable to be dismissed. 4. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application of the assessee is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Anubhav Sharma) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 16/03/2023 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS*