ITO, Wd.-2(4), Jalgaon V. Shri Pandit Narayan Mahajan, Jalgaon

MA 96/PUN/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9555 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 16-03-2012
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 12-05-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANN KAPTHUAMA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMB ER AND SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 96/PN/2010 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 506/PN/2004 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2000-01 THE I.T.O. WARD 2(4) JALGAON APPLICANT VS. SHRI PANDIT N. MAHAJAN, SINCE DECEASED L/H SMT. MIRABAI PANDIT MAHAJAN VISHAL PANDIT MAHAJAN BHUSHAN PANDIT MAHAJAN MAHAJAN SAW MILL, PACHORA ROAD, BHADGAON PAN AAUMP 2715 L .. RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : MS. ANN KAPTHUAMA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUNIL GANOO DATE OF HEARING : 31-8-201 2 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19-11 -2012 ORDER PER G.S. PANNU, A.M .: THE REVENUE HAS MOVED THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AGAI NST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 506/PN//2004 FOR A.Y. 2000-01 DATED 29-6-2007. 2. BY WAY OF PRESENT PETITION, IT IS CANVASSED THAT CERTA IN MISTAKES WITHIN THE MEANING OF SEC. 254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT (FOR SH ORT THE ACT) HAVE OCCURRED IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING O F GROUNDS OF APPEAL. THE MISTAKE POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED DR APPEARING F OR THE REVENUE IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER. WITH DUE RESPECT TO THE HONBLE ITTS ORDER, IT IS SUBM ITTED THAT THERE WAS NO SHORTAGE OF STOCK. THERE WAS AN EXCESS STOCK FOUND AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. THE AO HAS MENTIONED IN TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY TR UE TO THE EXTENT THAT CERTAIN BILLS, VOUCHERS AND CHALLANS W ERE NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. IT IS A FACT THAT THE BOOKS ARE INCOMPLETE AT THE TIME OF SURVE Y AND ASSESSEE HAS ALSO AGREED TO THIS FACT. HOWEVER, WHILE PREPA RING THE TENTATIVE TRADING ACCOUNT ALL THE BILLS, VOUCHERS AND CHALLANS WHICH WERE NOT ACCOUNTED FOR CLUBBED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH T HE ACCOUNTED BILL, VOUCHERS AND CHALLANS AND SUBMITTED THE TENTATIVE TRADING ACCOUNTS. THESE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ARE STIL L IN THE CUSTODY OF AO. WHILE PASSING THE ORDER, THE HONBL E ITAT DID NOT CONSIDER THIS VITAL FACT AND THE IMPUGNED BOOKS O F ACCOUNTS WITH A REPORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CALLED FOR BEFOR E DECIDING THE APPEAL THUS THE HONBLE ITAT HAS ERRONEOU SLY HELD THAT THE CIT(A) WAS UNJUSTIFIED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDI TION OF RS. 2,44,676/-. FURTHER, IT MAY BE MENTIONED WITH DUE RESPECT THAT THE DR HAD ALSO NOT EXPRESSED THESE FACTS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THERE APPEARS A MISTAKE APPARENT F ROM THE RECORD AND THE AFORESAID ORDER NEEDS TO BE AMENDED AFT ER CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. ON PERUSAL OF RECORDS, WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS TAKEN INTO CONSI DERATION ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS WHILE GRANTING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. IF THE CONT ENTION OF THE LEARNED DR IS ACCEPTED AT THIS STAGE, IT WOULD TANTAMOUNT TO REVIE W OF ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH IS IMPERMISSIBLE UNDER THE LAW. WE THE REFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND ACCORDING LY REJECT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE. 4. IN THE RESULT, PETITION OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) (G.S. PA NNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER PUNE, DATED THIS DAY OF 19 TH NOVEMBER 2012. ANKAM COPY TO:- 1) ASSESSEE, 2) DEPARTMENT 3) THE CIT(A) I AURANGABAD 4) CIT, AURANGABAD 5) DR, B BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE. 6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER SR. PS, ITAT PUNE