MANISH TANDON ,FARIDABAD V. ITO, WARD-2(4), GURGAON

MA 29/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case revolves around a dispute concerning the tax deducted at source on the salary paid to the assessee, Manish Tandon, for the assessment year 2016-17. Initially, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to verify the quantum of tax deducted at source by the employer. The assessee later filed a miscellaneous application challenging this direction, which was dismissed by the Tribunal. The assessee then filed another miscellaneous application seeking modification of the dismissal, which was also dismissed. The Tribunal's decisions were based on the interpretation of Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, which does not allow for rectification of mistakes in orders passed under this section.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471581 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Laws Referred To: Section 205 of the Act, Section 254(2) of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT KATOCH
• Assessee Lawyers: D.C. GARG
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 254(2); 205

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-FRIDAY’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT Miscellaneous Application No. 29/Del/2024 Arising out of MA 235/Del/2022 (In ITA No.1735/Del/2021) Assessment Year : 2016-17 Manish Tandon, Flat No. 201, Tower-8, Nirwana Country, The Close South Gurugram-121007 Haryana PAN : AEFPT0453B Vs. ITO, Ward 2(4), Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri D.C. Garg, CA Respondent by : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 21.03.2025 Date of pronouncement : 04.04.2025 ORDER Assessee has filed this miscellaneous application for modification in the Order dated 02.01.2024 in MA No. 235/Del/2022 arising out of order dated 24.06.2022 passed in ITA No. 1735/Del/2021 for the assessment year 2016-17 wherein, the assessee has requested to accept this misc. application and prayed for issue of following appropriate orders: a) Modification in the order dated 24.6.2022 in Appeal No. 1735/Del/2021 to the extent of removal of direction to the AO to make inquiry with the employer and factually verify the quantum of tax deducted at source on the payment of salary to the assessee. b) Any other order or direction, which the Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit and proper. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that the Tribunal vide order dated 24.6.2022 passed in ITA no. 1735/Del/2021 (AY 2016-17) allowed the appeal for statistical purposes with the following directions:- “12. In view of the aforesaid, I restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to make inquiry with the employer and factually verify the quantum of tax deducted at source on payment of salary to the assessee. In case, it is found that the employer has deducted the amount as claimed by the assessee in terms with section 205 of the Act, MA-29/Del/2024 2 credit has to be given for the full amount of tax deducted at source, irrespective of the fact, whether it was remitted to the account of the Central Government or not.” 3. It is further noted that against the above directions, earlier the assessee has filed the Misc. Application No. 235/Del/2022, which was dismissed vide order dated 02.01.2024 by the Tribunal with the following observations:- “7. I am of the view, there is no mistake, much less, any mistake apparent on the face of record as envisaged under section 254(2) of the Act. Whether, the Assessing Officer would be able to follow the directions of the Tribunal or not is a fact which can be ascertained when the Assessing Officer implements the directions of the Tribunal. On mere apprehension that the directions of the Tribunal are unlikely to be followed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee could not have filed the present application.” 4. I have considered the submissions of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative and perused the records. I am of the considered view, there is no mistake, much less, any mistake apparent on the face of record as envisaged under Section 254(2) of the Act. Moreover, it is settled law that if the order under sub-section (2) of Section 254 is passed, the said order would not be available for rectification of mistake again under section 254(2) of the Act. The order passed under section 254(2) cannot be rectified nor amended by invoking sub-section (2) of section 254 once again. Repetitive applications under section 254(2) of the Act are not permissible. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix, I do not find any merit in the present application, hence, the same deserve to be dismissed. I hold and direct accordingly. 5. In the result, the miscellaneous application of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on 04th April, 2025. Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT SR BHATNAGAR Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT MA-29/Del/2024 3 Assistant Registrar "