KANTILAL BISHWESHWAR PAL,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS, CPC, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 337/PUN/2022Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 December 20225 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that its previous order did not suffer from any apparent mistake. The assessee's arguments were already considered and rejected in the detailed discussion of the substantive grounds of appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a miscellaneous application under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act seeking to recall or rectify a previous ITAT order. This order had upheld the disallowance of payments made to Shri Ramesh Shinde and M/s. Yashwant Ghadke Nagar Co-operative Housing Society.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT order suffers from an apparent mistake that warrants rectification or recall under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A” : PUNE

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Hearing: 16.06.2023Pronounced: 16.06.2023

ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :

This assessee’s miscellaneous application M.A.No.337/PUN./2022 filed u/s.254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") seeks to recall/rectify the tribunal’s order dated 08.06.2023 upholding the learned lower authorities action disallowing payment(s) made to Shri Ramesh Shinde of Rs.3,46,00,000/- and Rs.1,00,00,000/- to M/s. Yashwant Ghadke Nagar Co-operative Housing Society; respectively.

2 M.A.No.337/PUN./2022

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

2.

We find at the outset that our detailed discussion has rejected the assessee’s twin substantive grounds as under:

3 M.A.No.337/PUN./2022

4 M.A.No.337/PUN./2022

3.

Learned counsel invited our attention to the assessee’s pleadings in the instant miscellaneous application that our impugned order dated 08.06.2023 suffers from many apparent mistakes on record. He could hardly dispute that our detailed discussion has already rejected all the submissions and therefore, there is hardly any occasion for us to invoke sec.254(2) of the Act to re-appreciate the entire evidence at this stage in light of ACIT vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd., [2008] 305 ITR 227 (SC) and CIT vs. Reliance Telecom Ltd., [2021] 133 taxmann.com 41 (SC). Faced with the situation, we hold that our impugned order does not suffer

5 M.A.No.337/PUN./2022 from any mistake even much less an apparent one so as to invoke sec.254(2) rectification jurisdiction. Rejected accordingly.

4.

This assessee’s miscellaneous application is dismissed in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 16.06.2023.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →