VILAYIL SATYAN PILLAI,DELHI V. ITO,WARD-60(5), NEW DELHI

MA 135/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Vilayil Satyan Pillai, the applicant, who filed a Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking rectification of an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi 'H' Bench. The original appeal concerned additions made by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) regarding unconfirmed sundry creditors and discrepancies in closing balances, amounting to Rs.6,80,14,124 and Rs.2,11,500 respectively. The Tribunal had dismissed the appeal, leading to the filing of the Miscellaneous Application. The application argued that the Tribunal had not considered the grounds of appeal and that the discussion during the hearing was different from the order passed. However, the Tribunal found no mistake in the original order that warranted rectification under section 254(2).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775803 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARPREET KAUR HANSRA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 133(6)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘H’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA No 135/DEL/2024 (A/o ITA No. 972/DEL/2021 [A.Y 2013-14]) Mr. Vilayil Satyan Pillai Vs. The I.T.O F-13, 3rd Floor, Near Delhi Police Ward -60(5) Society, Janta Garden New Delhi Pandav Nagar, New Delhi PAN : BIFPP 2903 R (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : .09.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- With this order we shall dispose of the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue u/s 254(2) of the Income tax Act, 1961 [for short, 'the Act'] for rectifying the mistakes apparent in the order of this Bench of the Tribunal dated 06.10.2023 for the above captioned A.Y. Printed from counselvise.com 2 MA No 135/DEL/2024 Vilayil Satyan Pillai 2. The Miscellaneous Application reads as under: “1. The appeal was filed dated 12.08.2021 before the Hon'ble F Bench under case type DBC, against the order of Ld. CIT(A) in confirmation of the order passed by Ld. ITO, Ward 60(5), Delhi for making addition of Rs.6,76,14,124/- related to sundry creditors not proved genuine and addition of Rs.2,11,500/- on account of difference being of excess amount as per confirmation received in response to notice u/s 133(6) of the income tax act, 1961 2. The present miscellaneous application u/s 254(2) is filed in this case for rectification or restoration of appeal, against the order of the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi, Bench 'H', New Delhi passed on 16.10.2023, on or after the last hearing dated 17.07.2023 spoken the word \"Heard' by the Bench. 3. The present miscellaneous application filed is within the statutory time limit of six month from the order pronounced dated 16.10.2023, which is not barred by limitation under section 254(2) of the income tax act, 1961. The copy of order pronounced dated 16.10.2023 and order served speed post dated 04.11.2023 are enclosed as Annexure-1. 4. The Hon'ble 'H' Bench has passed the order by dismissed the appeal of assessee, on the other than subject to hearing grounds that \"assessee has not submitted any details of movement of goods, receipt of the goods .No evidences to prove the genuineness of the Printed from counselvise.com 3 MA No 135/DEL/2024 Vilayil Satyan Pillai purchase have been provided to the revenue authorities. The assessee has failed to discharge the primary onus casted upon him\". 5. The subject matter of the appeal was on account of addition of Rs.6,80,14,124/- due to unconfirmed sundry creditors and unserved notices to sundry creditors during the course of assessment proceeding relevant to Α.Υ.2013-14. 6. The Ld. A.O had just made the additions of Rs.6,80,14,124/- due to notices u/s 133(6) of the income tax act, 1961 were remain un-served to 9 parties called sundry creditors as per books of account, replies were not received from 3 parties and few difference into closing balance of 2 parties called sundry creditor as on 31.03.2013, out of total 21 parties by Post. 7. The copy of Form-36 alongwith Grounds of appeal filed before the bench & ITAT Members are reproduced as Annexure-2. 8. That on the above facts and circumstances of the case, the grounds for miscellaneous application u/s 254(2) for rectification or restoration of appeal, against the order passed by Hon'ble ITAT, Bench 'H', Delhi dated 16.10.2023 are sufficient caused as under:- a. That the grounds for appeal filed at the time of appeal were not duly considered by the Hon'ble bench on the basis for order before the ordered pronounced by Hon'ble Bench for F.Y.2012-13. Printed from counselvise.com 4 MA No 135/DEL/2024 Vilayil Satyan Pillai b. That the discussion or issues discussed at the time of hearing concluded are totally different from the order passed by Hon'ble Bench. c. That the basis for dismissed the appeal are completely different than the basis of grounds of appeal filed at the time of hearing by appellant. d. That the time period for pronounced the order by the bench, after its last hearing date lead the long gap, wherein the opportunity for further evidences or document, if any required or asked by the bench may be provided by the appellant before the Hon'ble Bench. e. That the confirmation from the sundry creditors were mere denied, due to not quoting the pan or signing authority not identified. The appellant have also separate annexures in addition to confirmation paper of suppliers, which were not raised into concern by the bench at the time of last hearing. f. That the verification of purchase from sundry creditor's may be supported from the ledger copy of suppliers, which was neither considered into the order and neither raised the concern at the time of hearing by the bench. g. That the copies of annexures duly signed and returned by appellant's firm to suppliers were not questioned or neither supported by bench after or at the time of hearing, Printed from counselvise.com 5 MA No 135/DEL/2024 Vilayil Satyan Pillai as mentioned in the balance confirmation & ledger copies of suppliers for the period from 01.04.2012 to 31.03.2013. h. That the case law relevant and pertinent to case, enclosed into the paper book were not even considered into his order by Hon'ble Bench. i. That the affidavit duly signed by appellant for miscellaneous application of rectification u/s 254(2) of the income tax act, 1961, against the order passed by Hon'ble 'H' Bench dated 16.10.2023 for F.Y.2012-13 is enclosed as Annexure-3. 9. It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this present miscellaneous application u/s 254(2) may kindly be allowed and admitted for sake of opportunity of being granted under above reasonable cause and justice may be get delivered to the appellant in the above case & oblige.” 3. None appeared for or on behalf of the assessee. We heard the ld. DR and perused the contents of the Miscellaneous Application. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. A perusal of the above contents in the Miscellaneous Application shows that except for the grievance that the Bench has not considered the grounds of appeal, nothing has been brought on record Printed from counselvise.com 6 MA No 135/DEL/2024 Vilayil Satyan Pillai to point out any mistake rectifiable u/s 254(2) of the Act. We find that the Tribunal has decided the appeal considering the merits of the case and on the facts available on record. Therefore, provisions of section 254(2) are not applicable. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application of the assessee in MA No. 135/DEL/2024 is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 10.09.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [MADHUMITA ROY] [NAVEEN CHANDRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 10th SEPTEMBER, 2025. VL/ Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Sl No. PARTICULARS DATES 1. Date of dictation of Tribunal Order Printed from counselvise.com 7 MA No 135/DEL/2024 Vilayil Satyan Pillai 2. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictation Member 3. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the other Member 4. Date on which the approved draft Tribunal Order comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 5. Date on which the fair Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 6. Date on which the signed order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S 7. Date on which the final Tribunal Order is uploaded by the Sr. P.S./P.S. on official website 8. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk alongwith Tribunal Order 9. Date of killing off the disposed of files on the judiSIS portal of ITAT by the Bench Clerks 10. Date on which the file goes to the Supervisor (Judicial) 11. The date on which the file goes for xerox 12. The date on which the file goes for endorsement 13. The date on which the file goes to the Superintendent for checking 14. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the Tribunal order 15. Date on which the file goes to the dispatch section 16. Date of Dispatch of the Order Printed from counselvise.com "