Irfan Mohamed Ismail Patel, Surat V. The ACIT., CIRCLE-6, Surat

MA 95/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6282 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K DHANISTA
• Assessee Lawyers: J P SHAH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI G. D.AGARWAL, VP AND BHAVNESH SAINI, JM) M. A. NO.95/AHD/2010 (IN ITA NO.2230/AHD/2004 A. Y. 2001-02) IRFAN MOHAMED ISMAIL PATEL, B-22, AKSHA NAGAR, M. G. ROAD, BARDOLI, DIST. SURAT VS THE A. C. I. T., CIRCLE-6, SURAT PA NO. AAFPI 2378 J (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI J. P. SHAH, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI R. K. DHANISTA, DR ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI : THIS MISC. APPLICATION IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATE D 04-08-2006 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. 2. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.2230/AHD/20 04 RAISING THE ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE IT ACT BARRED BY LIMITATION WITH CHALLENGING THE ADDITION ON MERIT OF RS.11,58,912/- ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL WHILE D EALING ON THE FIRST ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE IT ACT BARRED BY LIMITATION RESTORED THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) F OR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH. HOWEVER, THE TRIBUNAL DID NOT DECIDE THE SE COND ISSUE OF APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS.11,58,912/- O N MERIT. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, SUBMIT TED THAT THERE APPEARS MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 04-08-2006 AND MA NO.95/AHD/2010 (IN ITA NO.2230/AHD/2004 IRFAN MOHAMED ISMAIL PATEL VS ACIT, CIRCLE- 6, SURA T 2 THE SAME MAY BE RECTIFIED. THE LEARNED DR DID NOT O BJECT TO THE SAME. 3. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS, WE FIND THAT THE CO NTENTION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS CORRECT. THE AS SESSEE RAISED SECOND GROUND OF APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL CHALLEN GING THE ADDITION OF RS.11,58,912/- ON MERIT. HOWEVER, THE TRIBUNAL W HILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL DID NOT DECIDE THE ABOVE GROUND OF APPEA L DESPITE THE SAME WAS ALSO NOTED ON PAGE 1 OF THE ORDER DATED 04 -08-2006. THEREFORE, THERE APPEARS MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD AND THE SAME SHALL HAVE TO BE RECTIFIED. WE ACCORDINGLY, RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 04-08-2006 FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE F OR DECIDING GROUND NO.2 OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING THE ADDITION ON MERIT OF RS.11,58,912/-. THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE AS SESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. OFFICE IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE MAIN APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.2230/AHD/2004 FOR HEARING ON GRO UND NO.2 ABOVE ON 21-06-2011. 4. IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06-04-2011 SD/- SD/- (G. D. AGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 06-04-2011 LAKSHMIKANT/- MA NO.95/AHD/2010 (IN ITA NO.2230/AHD/2004 IRFAN MOHAMED ISMAIL PATEL VS ACIT, CIRCLE- 6, SURA T 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD