The ITO, Ward-2, Vizianagaram v. Sri Mukesh Modi (Rep Late Sri Pavan Kumar Modi, Vizianagaram

MA 93/VIZ/2010 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 9325324 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAEFJ9791P
Bench Visakhapatnam
Appeal Number MA 93/VIZ/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 month(s) 6 day(s)
Appellant The ITO, Ward-2, Vizianagaram
Respondent Sri Mukesh Modi (Rep Late Sri Pavan Kumar Modi, Vizianagaram
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 09-09-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 09-09-2010
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 03-08-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BR BASKARAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO.90/VIZAG/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.191/VIZAG/2009) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1985-86 ITO WARD-2 VIZIANAGARAM JANATHA TEXTILES VIZIANAGARAM (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.AAEFJ 9791P MA NO.91/VIZAG/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.192/VIZAG/2009) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1985-86 ITO WARD-2 VIZIANAGARAM SMT. PADMADEVI MODI VIZIANAGARAM (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.ABTTM 9740M MA NO.92/VIZAG/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.193/VIZAG/2009) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1985-86 ITO WARD-2 VIZIANAGARAM SRI SUNIL KUMAR MODI (L/R OF LATE RADHE SYAM MODI) VIZIANAGARAM (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.BFSPS 1891H MA NO.93/VIZAG/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.194/VIZAG/2009) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1985-86 ITO WARD-2 VIZIANAGARAM SRI MUKESH MODI REPRESENTING LATE SRI PAWAN KUMAR MODI VIZIANAGARAM (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.AIPPM 0844B 2 MA NO.94/VIZAG/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.195/VIZAG/2009) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1985-86 ITO WARD-2 VIZIANAGARAM SMT. INDIRA CHIRIMAR VIZIANAGARAM (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.AAYPC 4670N APPELLANT BY: SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH DR RESPONDENT BY: N O N E ORDER PER SHRI S.K. YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29.1.2 010 ON COMMON GROUNDS THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL DIRECTING THE A.O. TO ALLOW THE INTEREST U/S 244(1A) OF THE ACT ON THE REFUND OF IN TEREST CHARGED U/S 220(2) OF THE I.T. ACT WITHOUT REALIZING THAT THE APPEAL W AS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES WITH RESPECT TO THE SCOPE OF SECTION 154 OF THE ACT . THEREFORE THAT AN ERROR HAS CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WHICH CALLS FOR A RECTIFICATION. THE LD. D.R. FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE BE FORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS WHETHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN REJE CTING THE APPLICATION FILED U/S 154 OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE CLAIM OF INTEREST U/S 244(1A) CANNOT BE GRANTED IN RECTIFICATION PROCEEDINGS. TH EREFORE THE ISSUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS WHETHER THERE WAS ANY MISTAKE APPA RENT FROM THE RECORD WHICH NEEDS A RECTIFICATION U/S 154 OF THE ACT. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEES HAS FILED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS TAKING A STAND THAT INITIALLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ONLY ALLOWED THE REFUND OF INTEREST CHARGED U/S 220(2) OF THE ACT BUT HE HA S IGNORED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 244(1A) OF THE ACT UNDER WHICH ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR THE INTEREST ON REFUND. THEREFORE THE TRIBUNAL HAS GRANTED A RELI EF TO THE ASSESSEES TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED. THEREFORE NO ERRO R HAS CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULL Y PERUSED THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS VIS--VIS THE ORDER OF T HE TRIBUNAL AND WE FIND THAT 3 BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED MAINLY TWO GROUNDS FIRST WITH REGARD TO THE SCOPE OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 154 OF THE I.T. ACT AND SECOND WITH REGARD TO THE ENTITLEMENT OF THE ASSESSEES FOR AN INTEREST AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 244(1A) OF THE I.T. ACT. THE TRIBUNAL HAS ADJUDICATED IN ITS ORDER BOTH THE ISSUES AND HAS FINALLY CONCLUDED THAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR THE INTEREST U/S 244(1A) OF THE ACT AND ACCORDINGLY THE TRIBUNAL SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT (A) AND DIRECTED THE A.O. TO ALLOW INTEREST U/S 244(1A) OF THE ACT ON THE REF UND OF INTEREST CHARGED U/S 220(2) OF THE ACT. THE TRIBUNAL WAS QUITE CONSCIOU S ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE CLAIM OF INTEREST U/S 244(1A) WAS RAISED THROUGH AN APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE ACT AND THESE FACTS WERE ALSO STATED IN THE ORDER O F THE TRIBUNAL. SINCE THE TRIBUNAL HAS EXAMINED ALL THE FACTS WHILE ADJUDICAT ING THE IMPUGNED ISSUE WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR APPARENT IN THE ORDER OF T HE TRIBUNAL. WE THEREFORE FIND NO MERIT IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS OF THE REVENUE AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME ARE REJECTED. 4. IN THE RESULT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9.9.2010 SD/- SD/- (BR BASKARAN) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VG/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM DATED 9 TH SEPTEMBER 2010 COPY TO 1 ITO WARD-2 VIZIANAGARAM 2 M/S. ROWE & PAL CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS 4-3-40 K OTHAGRAHARAM VIZIANAGARAM 3 THE CIT VISAKHAPATNAM 4 THE CIT(A) VISAKHAPATNAM 5 THE ADDL. CIT RANGE-3 VISAKHAPATNAM 6 THE DR ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM. 7 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM