9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 1410 - AT - Income TaxRectification of mistake u/s 254 - Benefit of deduction provided u/s 80P(2)(d) - Non-consideration of a judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in SABARKANTHA DISTRICT COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD. 2014 (6) TMI 977 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT - HELD THAT - Admittedly the above judgment cited by the ld. AR of the assessee of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court has not been considered by this Tribunal in its order - Non-consideration of the judgment of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court constitutes a mistake apparent from record as held by Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ld. 2003 (3) TMI 70 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT which has been upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court 2008 (9) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT . We hold that there is a mistake in the order of this Tribunal which needs to be rectified under section 254(2) of the Act. Accordingly we recall the order of this tribunal as discussed above for limited purpose of fresh adjudication of grounds bearing Nos. from 2 to 5 filed in the memo of appeal as per the provisions of law. Accordingly the registry is directed to fix the case for fresh hearing under intimation to both the parties. Hence the MA filed by the assessee is allowed.
Issues:
Recall of grounds of appeal based on mistake apparent from the record in relation to the denial of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Analysis: The assessee filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking to recall the grounds of appeal raised in ITA No. 2100/Ahd/2014, contending that there was a mistake apparent from the record. The ITAT had denied the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) amounting to Rs. 72,39,179/- based on a previous judgment. The assessee argued that a judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in a similar case was not considered by the Tribunal, rendering the order erroneous. The non-consideration of the High Court judgment was claimed to be a mistake apparent from the record under section 254(2) of the Act. The assessee requested to recall the grounds for fresh adjudication based on the new evidence presented. The arguments presented by the Ld. AR for the assessee were not refuted by the Ld. DR, who, however, supported the ITAT's order. After hearing both parties and examining the record, the ITAT acknowledged that the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court, as highlighted by the assessee, was not considered in the previous order. Citing legal precedent, the ITAT concluded that the non-consideration of a judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court constitutes a mistake apparent from the record. Relying on the decision in ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd., the ITAT held that the failure to consider such a judgment necessitates rectification under section 254(2) of the Act. Consequently, the ITAT decided to recall the order for the limited purpose of fresh adjudication on the specific grounds specified by the assessee in the memo of appeal. In light of the above analysis, the ITAT allowed the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee, directing the registry to schedule a fresh hearing for the specified grounds. The order was pronounced on 13/04/2022 at Ahmedabad, granting the relief sought by the assessee for reconsideration of the grounds of appeal in accordance with the law.
|
