SHRI KANHAIYA LAL,PALI V. ITO, SUMERPUR

MA 6/JODH/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an application under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act by Sh. Kanhaiya Lal, the appellant in a previous appeal (ITA No. 528/Jodh/2018), concerning the assessment year 2014-2015. The original appeal was remanded to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment. The appellant sought rectification of what he claimed were typographical mistakes in the tribunal's order dated 11.09.2023, which he argued did not accurately reflect the submissions made on his behalf regarding the stock inventory. However, the tribunal found that the rectification application was no longer pertinent due to the subsequent re-assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, which the appellant has contested in a separate appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 707003 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 07-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 06-11-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KARNI DAD
• Assessee Lawyers: WAY OF FINAL

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR. BEFORE: Dr. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA No. 6/Jodh/2023 (Arising out of ITA No.528/Jodh/2018) Assessment year 2014-2015 Sh. Kanhaiya lal Main Bazar, Ghanerao, Desuri, Pali. [PAN: AFSPL4913L Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sumerpur. (Appellant) (Respondent) Applicant by : Shri Mukul Moondra, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Karni Dad, Addl. CIT(Sr. DR) Date of Hearing: 02/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement: 07/07/2025 ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER This order is to dispose of application u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act filed by the applicant, who was appellant in ITA No. 528/Jodh/2018, relating to the assessment year 2014-15. Said appeal of the assessee was disposed of, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for assessment afresh. MA No.6/Jodh/2023 Sh.Kanhaiya lal, Pali 2 2. Application came to be presented before the Registry on 07.11.2023 alleging that the order sought to be rectified was received on 21.10.2023. 3. Arguments heard. File perused. 4. As is available from five paragraphs’ application, the applicant has sought rectification of typographical mistakes in the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal on 11.09.2023. In first 3 paragraphs, applicant has tried to explain that what was presented in the written submission on behalf of the appellant by way of final arguments is different from what the Appellate Tribunal observed in para 7 of the final order. Mainstay of the applicant is that he was never supplied copy of stock inventory and further that no stock inventory was considered by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A). But, in the order dated 21.9.2023, the Appellate Tribunal, while referring to the above written submission, put forth the same like this: “The ld. AR for the assessee has submitted written submission and evidence pertaining to stock in trade inventory which was not produced before theld. AO and ld. CIT(A).” MA No.6/Jodh/2023 Sh.Kanhaiya lal, Pali 3 5. On going through the written submissions presented on behalf of the appellant for the purposes of disposal of his appeal, and tallying the same with the observations made in para 7 of the order passed in the appeal, it would transpire that the above observation by the Appellate Tribunal is not in consonance with the written submission on behalf of the appellant presented for final hearing. 6. Vide order dated 11.9.2023, the appeal filed by the assessee was disposed of and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer to comply with the directions issued by the Appellate Tribunal. 7. In the course of hearing on this application, on query by the Bench, Ld. AR for the applicant has pointed out that consequent upon remand of the matter to the Assessing Officer, as per order dated 11.09.2023, now sought to be rectified, the Assessing Officer has already passed re-assessment order and the appellant is in appeal before Learned CIT(A) having challenged said re-assessment order. Learned AR for the applicant has expressed inability to inform the date of re- assessment order and about the text of said order. In absence of text of the re-assessment order, it cannot be said as to whether the errors pointed out in the application were or were not brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer during re-assessment proceedings on remand, and as to how the Assessing Officer appreciated the same. MA No.6/Jodh/2023 Sh.Kanhaiya lal, Pali 4 8. Be that as it may, in view of above submission by Ld. AR for the appellant that re-assessment order has already been passed, present application seeking rectification of errors in the order, has become infructuous, especially when the office of the Assessing Officer has become functus officio, on having passed re-assessment order and the applicant having already challenged the same before CIT(A). Result 9. As a result, this Miscellaneous application filed by the appellant applicant is hereby dismissed. Judicial Member having joined and presided over through virtual mode from Jaipur Benches, order needs pronouncement under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 by placing the details on the notice board. After pronouncement, file be consigned to the record room. Record of the appeal file be also consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Sd/- PSd/- (Dr. M. L. Meena ) (Narinder Kumar ) Accountant Member Judicial Member Date: 07/07/2025 *Santosh Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: MA No.6/Jodh/2023 Sh.Kanhaiya lal, Pali 5 (3) The CIT(Appeals) (4) The CIT concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T By Order Asstt. Registrar "