Sri. B.H. Jagadish, Sira v. ITO, Tumkur

MA 9/BANG/2012 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 30-03-2012 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 921124 RSA 2012
Bench Bangalore
Appeal Number MA 9/BANG/2012
Duration Of Justice 1 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant Sri. B.H. Jagadish, Sira
Respondent ITO, Tumkur
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 30-03-2012
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 30-03-2012
Date Of Final Hearing 15-02-2013
Next Hearing Date 15-02-2013
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 24-02-2012
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE B BENCH BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI JM M.A.NOS.9 & 10(B)/2012 (IN ITA NOS.663 & 664(B.)/2011) (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2008-09) 1. SHRI B.H.JAGADISH RATHNIKEETAN RAGHAVENDRA SWAMY TEMPLE ROAD SIRA. 2. SHRI B.MANJUNATH M/S MANJUSHREE TEXTILES R.T.ROAD SIRA. PETITIONERS VS THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-2 TUMKUR RESPONDENT PETITIONERS BY : SHRI RAVI PRASAD CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI FARHAT HUSSAIN QURESHI CIT-I I DATE OF HEARING : 30-03-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30-03-2012 O R D E R PER SMT P. MADHAVI DEVI JM THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 254(2) OF THE IT ACT 1961 SEEKING REC TIFICATION OF THE MISTAKES APPARENT FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L DATED 15-11-2011. M.P.NOS.9 & 10(B)/2012 (IN ITA NOS.663 & 664(B)/2011 2 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WHILE REITERATING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY HIM IN THE APPLICATION STATED THAT THE ASSESSES IN THESE A PPEALS HAD FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES IN THE FORM OF CONFIRMAT ION LETTERS FROM THE TENANTS TO THE EFFECT THAT THEY TOOK POSSE SSION OF THE BUILDING ON 01-06-2011 WHEREAS THE TRIBUNAL AT PAR A 5 & 6 OF THE ORDER HAS STATED THAT THE DATE OF TAKING THE POSSESSION OF THE SHOPS IS JANUARY 2011. THUS ACCORDING TO H IM THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD WHICH NEEDS RECT IFICATION. 3. THE LEARNED DR DID NOT CONTEST THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS. 3.1 HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS RECTIFIED AS UNDER; IN PARA 5 & 6 OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 15-11- 2011 THE WORDS JANUARY 2011 SHALL BE READ AS JUNE 2011 3.2 IT IS ALSO BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THERE AR E TWO PARAGRAPHS ON PAGE-5 OF THE ORDER NUMBERED AS PARA- 5 ONLY AND THE PARAGRAPH NUMBERS NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. M.P.NOS.9 & 10(B)/2012 (IN ITA NOS.663 & 664(B)/2011 3 3.3 HAVING GONE THROUGH THE ORDER WE ARE SATISFIE D THAT THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD AND WE DIRECT THAT THE SECOND PARA OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN PAGE- 5 SHALL BE READ AS PARA-5.1 4. IN THE RESULT THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS FILE D BY THE ASSESSEES ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30-03-2012 SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: BANGALORE DATED: 30-03-2012 AM* COPY TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE REVENUE 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR 6. GF(BLORE) 7. GF(DELHI) BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR