9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (12) TMI 214 - HC - Income TaxRectification / modification of order of Tribunal u/s 254 - discrepancy in the paper book submitted by the assessee before the tribunal - non furnishing the photocopy of FD - It has been explained by the petitioner that it was only after the receipt of the order of the Tribunal in the appeal that it came to know of the alleged discrepancy and had that been put to the petitioner in the course of the hearing before the Tribunal, it could have been explained by obtaining the necessary certificates from the bank even before the conclusion of the hearing. It was submitted that the petitioner could not have, even after due diligence and enquiry, been aware of the discrepancy and once he came to know of the same on receipt of the order of the Tribunal, he took steps to obtain the necessary certificates from the bank and produced them before the Tribunal along with the application for modification of the order of the Tribunal. It was further submitted that no prejudice would be caused to the Revenue if the certificates are directed to be examined by the Assessing Officer and a fresh decision be taken in the interest of justice. Held that - matter remanded back to AO for due consideration of the documents sought to be placed on record through the Miscellaneous Application before the Tribunal.
Issues:
1. Block assessment under Section 158BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Dismissal of appeal by CIT(Appeals). 3. Partial allowance of appeal by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 4. Application under Section 254(2) seeking rectification of the Tribunal's order. 5. Dismissal of the application by the Tribunal. 6. Remittal of the matter to the Assessing Officer. Block Assessment under Section 158BC: The petitioner, an individual, underwent a search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, leading to a notice under Section 158BC to file a return of undisclosed income. The Assessing Officer assessed the undisclosed income for the block period, resulting in a demand of tax. An appeal to the CIT(Appeals) challenging the additions made was dismissed. Subsequently, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, granting relief on specific amounts, while confirming the rest of the additions. Dismissal of Appeal by CIT(Appeals): The CIT(Appeals) dismissed the petitioner's appeal questioning the additions made during the block assessment year, including cash, fixed deposit receipts, and bank deposits. This dismissal prompted the petitioner to further appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Partial Allowance of Appeal by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal: The Tribunal partially allowed the petitioner's appeal, accepting explanations for certain cash amounts found during the search and restoring the issue of bank deposits to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. However, other additions were confirmed, leading to the partial allowance of the appeal. Application under Section 254(2) Seeking Rectification: The petitioner sought rectification of the Tribunal's order under Section 254(2) based on alleged mistakes apparent from the record, particularly concerning fixed deposit receipts. The petitioner provided a certificate from a bank to support the claim of no discrepancy in the fixed deposit receipts, which was not considered by the Tribunal. Dismissal of the Application by the Tribunal: The Tribunal dismissed the petitioner's application for rectification, stating that the alleged mistakes were not apparent and amounted to a request for a review, which is not permitted under Section 254(2). The Tribunal emphasized that the evidence presented post-hearing could not be accepted as rectification grounds. Remittal of the Matter to the Assessing Officer: The High Court allowed the writ petition, remitting the matter to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration based on the documents submitted through the miscellaneous application before the Tribunal. The Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue agreed to this remittal, acknowledging the need for further consideration based on the additional evidence presented.
|
