Sh Satya Pal Saini, Ex-MLA, Pathankot V. The Dy.Commissioner of Inocme-tax, Pathankot

MA 93/ASR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1486 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 10-08-2018
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM DEB
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M. A. NO. 93/ASR/2014 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 63/ASR/2013) A SSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 SATYA PAL SAINI, EX-MLA, PATHANKOT [PAN: APUPS 5712C] VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -VI, PATHANKOT (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. P. N. ARORA (AD V.) RESPONDENT BY: SH. GAUTAM DEB (D.R.) DATE OF HEARING: 10.08.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05.11.2018 ORDER PER SANJAY ARORA, AM: THIS IS A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER U/S. 254(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT' HEREINAFTER) DATED 20.5.2014 BY THE TRIBUNAL DISPOSING THE ASSESSEES CAPTIONED APP EAL. 2. AS A READING OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER SHOWS, THE AS SESSEES APPEAL WAS DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE FIRST INSTANCE ON 19 .8.2013 IN A BATCH OF APPEALS (COPY ON RECORD). THE ASSESSEE MOVED THE TRIBUNAL, STATING THAT GROUNDS 4 AND 5 OF HIS APPEAL HAD REMAINED TO BE DECIDED BY IT. THE TR IBUNAL, ACCORDINGLY, ADMITTING ITS MISTAKE, REINSTATED ITS ORDER DATED 19.8.2013 FOR DECIDING THE ASSESSEES SAID GROUNDS VIDE ITS ORDER U/S. 254(2) DATED 30.01.2014 . THE SAME WERE ACCORDINGLY DECIDED VIDE ITS ORDER U/S. 254(1) DATED 20.5.2014 . THE ASSESSEE HAS NOW MOVED M.A. NO. 93/ASR/2014 (AY 2007-08) (ARIS ING OUT OF ITA NO. 63/ASR/2013) SATYA PAL SAINI V. DY. CIT 2 AN APPLICATION U/S. 254(2) OF THE ACT RAISING THE S AME ISSUE, I.E., THAT GROUNDS 4 AND 5 OF HIS APPEAL HAVE NOT BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUN AL. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SH. ARORA, WAS DURING HEARING, FOR THE PU RPOSE, ASKED TO TAKE US THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE SAID ORDER IS COMPLETE IN I TSELF. VIDE PARA 1 THE TRIBUNAL DISCUSSES THE BACKGROUND FACTS OF THE CASE AS WELL AS REPRODUCES THE RELEVANT GROUNDS, I.E., GDS. 4 AND 5. IT, THEN, PROCEEDS TO DISCUSS THE SAME. IT CONSIDERS AND DECIDES GROUND 4 ON MERITS VIDE PARAS 2 AND 3, AND GD. 5 VIDE PARAS 4 AND 5 OF ITS ORDER, DISMISSING BOTH. VIDE PARA 6, THE TRIBUNAL C ONCLUDES BY RECORDING THE FACT OF THE DISMISSAL OF THE SAID GROUNDS INASMUCH AS THE R EINSTATEMENT OF THE APPEAL WAS ONLY FOR DECIDING THESE GROUNDS. THE ASSESSEES INSTANT APPLICATION IS UNDER THE CIR CUMSTANCES NOT MAINTAINABLE. SH. ARORA, APART FROM BEING UNABLE TO ANSWER THIS DURING HEARING, COULD NOT EVEN OTHERWISE POINT OUT ANY INFIRMITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, I.E., QUA THE DISPOSAL OF THE ASSESSEES GROUNDS 4 AND 5. WE, ACCORDINGLY, HAVE NO HESITATION IN DISMISSING THE ASSESSEES INSTANT APPLICATION AS WITHOUT MERIT. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES INSTANT PETITION I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON NOVEMBER 05, 2018 SD/- SD/- (N. K. CHOUDHRY) (SANJAY ARORA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 05.11.2018 /GP/SR. PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE APPELLANT: SATYA PAL SAINI, EX-MLA, PAT HANKOT (2) THE RESPONDENT: DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -VI, PATHANKOT (3) THE CIT (4) THE CIT CONCERNED TRUE COPY (5) THE SR. DR, I.T.A.T. BY ORDER