2019 (6) TMI 1601 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification application - Validity of the reopening of the assessment u/s 147 of the Act read with section 148 - Initially the assessee had not pressed the aforesaid grounds as the same were not permitted by the Committee on Disputes - HELD THAT - As held in the of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. 2011 (2) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT the approval of the Committee on Disputes was not required for pursuing the appeals before the I.T.A.T. and Courts. The assessee, accordingly, duly pressed those grounds. The above said grounds inadvertently were dismissed as not pressed be cause of the earlier note put on against the aforesaid grounds. Earlier, the Committee on Dispute s had not permitted to raise the aforesaid grounds. However, later on since the assessee had become entitled to raise and press these legal issues, which go to the root of the case, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, duly pressed the same during arguments. In view of the above, a mistake apparent on record has occurred in the order of the Tribunal in not adjudicating the aforesaid legal issues on merits. The consolidated order 2018 (8) TMI 2027 - ITAT CHANDIGARH of this Tribunal is, therefore, recalled to the limited extent and purpose for adjudication of the related ground.Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee are treated as allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Misinterpretation of grounds not pressed by the assessee leading to dismissal without adjudication in the consolidated order dated 3.8.2018 of the Tribunal.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Misinterpretation of Grounds Not Pressed

The assessee, State Bank of India, moved Miscellaneous Applications stating that a mistake occurred in the Tribunal's consolidated order dated 3.8.2018. The Tribunal inadvertently noted that certain grounds challenging the validity of notice u/s 148 were "not pressed" by the assessee and dismissed them without adjudication. The assessee argued that these grounds were indeed pressed, as evidenced by written submissions and arguments made during various hearings. The AR had elaborately presented documents contesting the reopening of assessments for both relevant years. The Tribunal acknowledged the mistake, noting that the grounds were dismissed due to an earlier note indicating non-permission by the Committee on Disputes, which was no longer required post a Supreme Court decision. Consequently, the Tribunal recalled the order for adjudication of the legal issues related to the validity of reopening the assessments.

Issue 2: Recalling the Order for Adjudication

Upon reviewing the contentions and logbook entries, the Tribunal found that the legal issues regarding the validity of reopening assessments were not adjudicated due to the misinterpretation of grounds as "not pressed." The Tribunal acknowledged the mistake and decided to recall the order for the limited purpose of adjudicating these legal issues. It was clarified that if the assessee succeeds on these legal issues, the previous findings on other matters would become academic. However, if the legal issues are decided against the assessee, the previous findings would remain in effect. The Miscellaneous Applications of the assessee were allowed, and the main appeals were directed to be fixed for adjudication on the legal issues as per the Tribunal's directions.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rectified the error in dismissing certain grounds without adjudication, recalling the order for the limited purpose of addressing the legal issues related to the validity of reopening assessments. The detailed arguments and submissions made by the assessee during various hearings were considered, leading to the decision to allow the Miscellaneous Applications and proceed with adjudication on the specified legal issues.