Shri Gopal Das Sharma S/o Shri Kishandas, Sehore v. The I.T.O., Bhopal

MA 13/IND/2010 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 05-08-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 1322724 RSA 2010
Bench Indore
Appeal Number MA 13/IND/2010
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 14 day(s)
Appellant Shri Gopal Das Sharma S/o Shri Kishandas, Sehore
Respondent The I.T.O., Bhopal
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 05-08-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 05-08-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 30-07-2010
Next Hearing Date 30-07-2010
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 21-04-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH : INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.KAUSHIK ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PAN NO. : - M.A.NO. 13/IND/2010 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A.NO. 184/IND/2002) A.Y. : 1989-90 SHRI GOPALDAS SHARMA CIT SEHORE VS MADHYA PRADESH BHOPAL. APPLICANT RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI SANJAY SODANI C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SMT. APARNA KARAN SR. DR O R D E R PER B. R. KAUSHIK A.M. THE ASSESSEE FILED MISC. APPLICATION ON 11 TH APRIL 2010 AGAINST THE DECISION DATED 30 TH OCTOBER 2002 IN I.T.A.NO. 184/IND/2002. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING CONT ENDED THAT THE MISC. PETITION HAS BEEN FILED IN PURSUANCE OF ORDER DATED 19.8.2008 OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TH E ASSESSEE. 3. THE LD. SENIOR D.R. POINTED OUT THAT THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT CORRECT IN SO F AR AS THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THAT HE DID NOT INTEND T O PRESS GROUND NO.2 OF - 2 - 2 THE APPEAL IN M.A.I.T. NO.11/2003 AND IN RESPECT OF GROUND NO.1 HE INTENDED TO FILE APPLICATION U/S 254 OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT 1961 BEFORE THE I.T.A.T. THE HON'BLE JURISDICTION HIGH COURT ON LY OBSERVED THAT IT WAS OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO FILE SUCH APPLICATION W ITHIN PARAMETERS OF LAW AND THUS WITH DUE RESPECT OBVIOUSLY THE MISC. AP PLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN PURSUANCE OF THE DIRECTION OF T HE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT BECAUSE THE FILING OF AP PLICATION WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF LAW WAS LEFT OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL IT WAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED ON 21 ST APRIL 2010 AGAINST THE I.T.A.T. ORDER DATED 30 TH OCT. 2002 AND THEREFORE IT WAS BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT OF FOUR YEARS. THE LD. COUNSE L SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE I.T.A.T. WAS DATED 13 TH SEPTEMBER 2007. THIS SUBMISSION IS NOT FOUND TO BE CORRECT BECAUSE THIS BENCH AS PER ORDER DATED `13 TH SEPTEMBER 2007 HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL OF THE DEPA RTMENT IN I.T.A.NOS. 206 & 207/IND/2002 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1989-90 AND 1990-91 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BUT THE MISC. PETITION IS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30 TH OCTOBER 2002 AND BEYOND TIME. IT IS ALSO SEEN FRO M THE MISC. APPLICATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY MISTAKE I N THE AFORESTATED ORDER OF THE I.T.A.T. AND HAS ONLY SUBMITTED THAT THE MIS C. APPLICATION WAS FILED IN PURSUANCE TO THE DIRECTIONS OF THE COURT WHICH IS NOT CORRECT AS - 3 - 3 DISCUSSED ABOVE. IN HIS WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS THE AS SESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAD CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT THE E ARNEST MONEY OF RS.1.50 LAKHS WAS DEPOSITED IN FEBRUARY 1988 AND THE LICENCE FEE THE EARNEST MONEY DEPOSIT AND BANK GUARANTEE WERE LIKEL Y TO BE DEPOSITED BEFORE THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH THE TRADE OF LIQ UOR HAD TAKEN PLACE AND THUS THE INITIAL INVESTMENT HAD BEEN MADE BEFORE T HE FINANCIAL YEAR AND THE ORDER OF THE I.T.A.T. WAS REQUIRED TO BE RECTIF IED. NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT THE MISC. APPLICATION IS TIME BARRED IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE IN THE NATURE OF REQ UEST FOR REVIEW OF THE ORDER OF THE I.T.A.T. AND THE LD. COUNSEL DURING T HE COURSE OF HEARING FAILED TO POINT OUT ANY PORTION OF THE ORDER OF THE I.T.A.T. DATED 30 TH OCTOBER 2002 IN I.T.A.NOS. 184 & 185/IND/2002 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 1989-90 AND 1990-91 WHICH SUFFERED FROM THE MISTAK E APPARENT FROM RECORD. THUS NOT ONLY THE MISC. PETITION IS BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED TIME BARRED BUT IT IS ALSO DEVOID OF MERIT. 5. THE MISC. PETITION IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. - 4 - 4 THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH AUGUST 2010. SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) (B. R. KAUSHIK) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 5 TH AUGUST 2010. CPU* 30748