RAJARAM RAJENDRA BHANDARI AND PARTY, Jaipur V. ACIT, Jaipur

MA 94/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4984 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 15-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROSHANTA MEENA JCIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: G M MEHTA

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO ] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YAD AV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ MA NO.94/JP/16 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.592/JP/2004 ) FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02 M/S RAJARAM RAJENDRA BHANDARI & PARTY (AJMER GROUP), C-82, PRITHVIRAJ ROAD, JAIPUR CUKE VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AAAAR 1100 P VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI G.M. MEHTA (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. ROSHANTA MEENA (J CIT ) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 21.10.2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21/10/2016. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THIS MISC. PETITION HAS BEEN FILED AGAINST THE ORDE R OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 592/JP/2004 AND ITA NO. 767/JP/2004 DATED 14. 07.2015. IN ITS PETITION, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT NO FINDINGS HAS BEE N GIVEN ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS AP PEAL: THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE LD. IT(A)-II, JAIPUR HAS ERRED IN LAW IN SUSTAINING TRADING ADDIT ION OF RS. 2,60,00,000/- AGAINST LOSS OF RS. 2,92,30,610/- SUFFERED BY THE A SSESEE MAINLY FOR THE REASON OF HIGH PAYMENT OF HIGH SHORT LICENCE TO TH E EXCISE DEPARTMENT MA NO. 94/JP/2004 M/S RAJARAM RAJENDRA BHANDARI VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR 2 2. THE ASSESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE A BOVE MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD MAY PLEASE BE RECTIFIED U/S 254(2) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 2.1 THE LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESEE AGAINST THE IMPUNGED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS SINCE BEEN DISMI SSED BY THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AND IN LIGHT OF THAT, THE SUBJ ECT PETITION OF THE APPLICANT SHOULD NOT BE ENTERTAINED. 2.2 AS THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED HAS BEEN DISMISSED BY THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH CO URT, WE DO NOT SEE ANY MERIT IN THE PRESENT APPLICATION. HENCE THE SAME I S DISMISSED. WITH THE ABOVE DIRECTIONS, THE MISC. APPLICATION IS DISPOSED OFF ACCORDINGLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21/1 0/2016. SD/- SD/- ( KUL BHARAT ) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 21/ 10/2016 PILLAI VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- M/S RAJARAM RAJENDRA BHANDARI & PART Y, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT II, JAIPUR 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ THE CIT(A)-II, JAIPUR 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (MA NO.94 /JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR MA NO. 94/JP/2004 M/S RAJARAM RAJENDRA BHANDARI VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR 3