The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Margao V. Shri Rohan Ramchandra Pai Panandikar, Margao

MA 9/PAN/2023

AI Insights

The case involves four miscellaneous applications (M.A.Nos.08 to 11/PAN./2023) filed by the Revenue against the Tribunal's earlier decision on appeals concerning Shri Rohit Ramchandra Pai Panandikar, Shri Rohan Ramchandra Pai Panandikar, and Smt. Rajani Ramchandra Pai Panandikar. The original appeals were dismissed due to low tax effect, with a finding that ongoing prosecution proceedings were not related to the assessment issues. The Revenue contested this finding, supported by a prosecution sanction dated 06.03.2017 from the Pr. Commissioner (Investigation), Panaji. The Tribunal acknowledged the mistake in the initial order and rectified it, leading to the recall of the order and rescheduling of the appeals for a full hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136820 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: AllowedAllowedAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 04-07-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A.No.08/PAN./2023 Arising out of ITA.Nos.253 & 254/PAN./2019 - Assessment Years 2010-2011 & 2011-12 The ACIT, Circle-1, Margao. vs. Shri Rohit Ramchandra Pai Panandikar, H.No.262, Panandikar Chambers, M.L. Furtado Road, Margao, Goa. PIN – 403 601. PAN ADHPP0844K (Applicant) (Respondent) M.A.No.09/PAN./2023 Arising out of ITA.Nos.255 & 256/PAN./2019 - Assessment Years 2010-2011 & 2011-12 The ACIT, Circle-1, Margao. vs. Shri Rohan Ramchandra Pai Panandikar, H.No.262, Panandikar Chambers, M.L. Furtado Road, Margao, Goa. PIN – 403 601. PAN ADHPP0845J (Applicant) (Respondent) M.A.Nos.10 & 11/PAN./2023 Arising out of ITA.Nos.257 & 258/PAN./2019 - Assessment Year 2010-2011 & 2011-12 The ACIT, Circle-1, Margao. vs. Smt. Rajani Ramchandra Pai Panandikar, H.No.262, Panandikar Chambers, M.L. Furtado Road, Margao, Goa. PIN – 403 601. PAN AINPP5255B (Applicant) (Respondent) 2 M.A.Nos.08 to 11/PAN./2023 For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikanth For Assessees : Shri Mihir Naniwadekar Date of Hearing : 18.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 22.08.2023 ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, A.M. : These Revenue’s four miscellaneous applications M.A.Nos.08 to 11/PAN./2023 filed u/sec.254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). seek to recall/rectify the tribunal’s common order dated 24.11.2022, in the corresponding main appeals I.T.A.Nos.253, 254, 255, 256, 257 & 258/PAN./2019. 2. For the sake of clarity and brevity, the facts relating to M.A.No. 8/PAN./2023 are stated as under : The Tribunal had disposed of the appeals filed by the Revenue bearing ITA.Nos.253 to 258/PAN./2019 vide consolidated order dated 24.11.2022 on low tax effect. While doing so, the Tribunal vide para-2 of the order rejected the objection of the department that it is covered by one of the exceptions mentioned in the CBDT circular holding that pending prosecution proceedings are not in relation to the assessment issues. However, the present M.As are filed by the Revenue contending that the findings recorded in para-2 of the impugned order that prosecution proceedings are not in 3 M.A.Nos.08 to 11/PAN./2023 relation to the issues in the appeal are contrary to the fact that the prosecution proceedings were initiated in relation to the issues in the assessment. In support of this contention, the Learned DR also placed on record the sanction for prosecution issued by the Pr. Commissioner (Investigation), Panaji dated 06.03.2017. 3. On the other end, the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee objects to the present M.As filed by the Revenue and submits that the sanction of prosecution is subsequent to the completion of the assessment proceedings and, therefore, has no relevance. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We have gone through the order passed by the Tribunal dated 24.11.2022 in ITA.Nos.253 to 258/PAN./2019 wherein this Tribunal recorded a finding that the prosecution proceedings were not in relation to the issues in the appeal; whereas, the sanction order issued by the Pr. Commissioner for prosecution clearly indicates that it is in relation to the assessment proceedings. The fact that the sanction of prosecution was issued subsequent to the completion of the assessment proceedings has no bearing on the issue. Therefore, it constitutes an apparent mistake on record and can be rectified by exercising the powers vested with us u/sec.254(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961. We, therefore, allow 4 M.A.Nos.08 to 11/PAN./2023 the M.As of the Revenue and recall the order of the Tribunal dated 24.11.2022 passed in ITA.Nos.253 to 258/PAN./2019 and direct the Registry to post the appeals in regular course of hearing. Ordered accordingly. 5. In the result, M.As of the Revenue are allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22.08.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY] [INTURI RAMA RAO] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pune, Dated August, 2023 VBP/- Copy to 1. The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A)-2, Panaji, Goa 4. The Pr. CIT (Central), Bangalore. 5. D.R. ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji 6. Guard File. //By Order// Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.