2018 (4) TMI 1687 - AT - Income Tax

Delay in filing Rectification Application u/s. 254(2) - delay of 97 days - Miscellaneous Application has been filed with the delay of 97 days - limitation of six months for filing Miscellaneous Application u/s. 254(2) - Tribunal power to condone the delay in filing of Miscellaneous Application - HELD THAT - A bare perusal of amended provisions show that the Miscellaneous Application seeking rectification of any mistake apparent from record can be filed by either side within a period of six months from the end of month in which the order was passed. In the present case, the order was passed on 29-07-2016, therefore, the limitation for filing of Miscellaneous Application u/s. 254(2) starts from 1st August, 2016 and the limitation ends on 31st January, 2017. This Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the assessee/applicant on 08-05-2017. Therefore, this Miscellaneous Application has been filed with the delay of 97 days and hence, is barred by limitation. The Tribunal has no power to condone the delay in filing of Miscellaneous Application under provisions of section 254(2) of the Act. The Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Raja Malwinder Singh Vs. Union of India Anr. 2005 (7) TMI 78 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT has held that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to amend any order passed by it under sub-section (1) of section 254 after the expiry of prescribed time limit, whether it is on its own volition or on an application being made by the assessee or the Assessing Officer. Also see Rahul Jee Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2008 (5) TMI 306 - ITAT DELHI-E The Tribunal cannot go into the reasons/merits for filing of Miscellaneous Application, as the Miscellaneous Application of the assessee suffers from limitation, hence, the same is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rectification of order under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 2003-04.
2. Delay in filing Miscellaneous Application beyond the prescribed limitation period of six months.

Issue 1: Rectification of order under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 2003-04:

The assessee filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking rectification in the Tribunal's order for the assessment year 2003-04, contending that an income of ?61.65 lakhs was erroneously added, which had already been taxed in the preceding assessment year. The application was filed within the six-month limitation period as per the amended provisions of section 254(2) of the Act. The Department opposed the application, citing it as time-barred. The Tribunal noted that the application was filed 97 days after the limitation period, making it barred by limitation. Citing case law, including the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, it was established that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to amend an order after the expiry of the prescribed time limit, regardless of the initiator. The Tribunal emphasized that it cannot condone the delay in filing under section 254(2) of the Act. The decision highlighted that the amended provisions of the Act govern the timeline for filing Miscellaneous Applications, and the Tribunal cannot consider the merits of the application if it is time-barred.

Issue 2: Delay in filing Miscellaneous Application beyond the prescribed limitation period of six months:

The Tribunal analyzed the timeline for filing the Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) and determined that the application was filed 97 days after the prescribed limitation period had lapsed. The assessee argued that the delay was due to the application being received late and relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court. However, the Tribunal distinguished the case cited by the assessee, emphasizing that the amended provisions of section 254(2) applied in the present case. The Tribunal dismissed the application, reiterating that the limitation period for filing such applications is crucial and cannot be overlooked, even if the delay is attributed to reasons beyond the assessee's control. The Tribunal's decision to dismiss the Miscellaneous Application was based on the clear provisions of the Act and established legal precedents regarding the limitation period for seeking rectification of orders.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee due to being time-barred, as it was filed beyond the prescribed limitation period of six months under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The decision emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory timelines for filing such applications and highlighted that the Tribunal cannot entertain applications that do not comply with the specified limitation period, irrespective of the reasons for the delay.