The D.C.I.T., Bhopal v. M/s. Gurukripa Constructions,, Bhopal

MA 15/IND/2010 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 02-07-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 1522724 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAFFG6001Q
Bench Indore
Appeal Number MA 15/IND/2010
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
Appellant The D.C.I.T., Bhopal
Respondent M/s. Gurukripa Constructions,, Bhopal
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 02-07-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 02-07-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 02-07-2010
Next Hearing Date 02-07-2010
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 23-04-2010
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V.K. GUPTA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS PETITOIN NOS.15 & 16/IND/2010 (ARISING OUT OF IT(SS)A NOS.217 & 218/IND/2007) A.YS. - 2004-05 & 2005-06 ACIT-1(1) BHOPAL APPLICANT VS. M/S. GURUKRIPA CONSTRUCTION BHOPAL PAN AAFFG 6001 Q RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI P.K. MITRA SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : S/SH. M.C.MEHTA & H.CHIMNANI CAS O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE SEEKING RECALLING OF THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF TRIBUNAL DATED 17.10.2008 AND 13.3.2009. DURING HEARING OF T HESE PETITIONS THE LD. SR. DR SHRI P.K. MITRA POINTED OUT THAT THE DEP ARTMENT FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 2 25.9.2007 WHICH WAS DISMISSED BY TRIBUNAL IN VIEW OF THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 05/2008 DATED 15.5.2008 (F.NO.279/M ISC.-142/2007- ITJ) PRESCRIBING MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.2 LACS. IT WA S FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN THESE INSTRUCTIONS IT HAS BEEN PRESCRIBED THAT IN CASE OF COMPOSITE ORDER OF ANY APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHICH I NVOLVES MORE THAN ONE YEAR APPEALS SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF ALL ASSESSMENT YEARS EVEN IF TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED MONETAR Y LIMIT. IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 FOR IT(SS)A NO.217 OF 2007 MAY BE RECALLED. FOR IT(SS) A NO.218 OF 200 7 THE LD. SR. DR TOOK IDENTICAL PLEA. 2. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE SHRI M.C. MEHTA ALONG WITH SHRI HITESH CHIMNANI CONTENDED THA T EXACTLY COMMON ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN BOTH THE APPEALS AND IT(SS)A NO.218/IND/2007 WAS DISMISSED ON MERITS BY THE BENCH AND NOT ON MON ETARY LIMIT. THE CRUX OF THE ARGUMENTS IS THAT EVEN SINCE THE AFORES AID APPEAL WAS DECIDED ON MERITS THEREFORE THE APPEAL IN IT(SS)A NO.217/IND/2007 IS COVERED BY THE DECISION DATED 13.3.2009 TAKEN IN IT (SS)A NO.218/IND/2007. THIS FACTUAL MATRIX WAS NOT CONTRO VERTED BY THE REVENUE. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THERE IS NO 3 DISPUTE TO THE FACT THAT THE BENCH VIDE ORDER DATED 17.10.2008 [IT(SS)NO.217 OF 2007] BY FOLLOWING VARIOUS DECISIO NS INCLUDING HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF T HE REVENUE ON PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMIT WHEREAS ON THE SAME FACTS THE APPEAL IN IT(SS)A NO.218 OF 2007 WAS DECIDED ON MERITS VIDE O RDER DATED 13.3.2009. EVEN IF THE ASSERTION OF THE LD. SR. DR IS CONSIDERED THE FACT REMAINS THAT EXACTLY ON THE COMMON ISSUE THE APPEA L OF THE REVENUE IN IT(SS)A NO.217 OF 2007 WILL NOT SURVIVE EVEN IF THE ORDER IS RECALLED AND AGAIN DECIDED ON MERIT BECAUSE THE RESULT WILL REMAIN THE SAME. THE REVENUE HAS NOT BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE ANY CONTR ARY DECISION FROM ANY HONBLE HIGHER FORUM CONTRARY TO THE DECISION T AKEN IN IT(SS)A NO.218 OF 2007. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH TO THE LD . DR WHETHER ANY PURPOSE WILL BE SERVED IF THE ORDER IS RECALLED MR . MITRA VERY FAIRLY/JUSTIFIABLY ADMITTED THAT FIRSTLY NO USEFUL PURPOSE WILL BE SERVED AND SECONDLY IT WILL BE A FUTILE EXERCISE EVEN IF THE ORDER IS RECALLED BECAUSE THE RESULT WILL REMAIN THE SAME. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS THERE IS NO MERIT IN THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS OF THE REVENUE. EVEN OTHERWISE THE POWERS OF THE TRIBUNAL U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT ARE VERY LIMITED UNLESS AND UNTIL ANY CLERICAL ARITHMETICAL OR MISTAKE OF FACT IS POINTED OUT. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS BOTH THESE MIS CELLANEOUS PETITIONS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 4 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS ON 2.7.2010. (V.K. GUPTA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2.7.2010 {VYAS} COPY TO APPELLANT RESPONDENT CIT CIT(A) DR GU ARD FILE