2020 (11) TMI 376 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification u/s 254 - no noting in the log book also about any arguments regarding these ground Nos. 8 to 19 - HELD THAT - Although contentions were raised that the Tribunal is not correct in saying that no argument was advanced by the learned AR of the assessee in course of hearing of the appeal in respect of ground Nos.8 to 19 but no evidence has been furnished by learned AR of the assessee in this regard establishing that arguments were in fact made by learned AR of the assessee in respect of these grounds also in course of hearing. In view of these facts that neither our log book nor the Paper Book filed by learned AR of the assessee and in the absence of any evidence being filed by learned AR of the assessee establishing that arguments were in fact raised by him regarding ground No.8 to 19 in course of hearing of the appeal, we find no merit in the MP filed by the assessee. Miscellaneous petition filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the Tribunal erred in not considering the arguments advanced by the assessee regarding certain grounds.
2. Whether the Tribunal's decision to dismiss the ground Nos.8 to 19 as not pressed is justified.

Analysis:
1. The assessee filed a Miscellaneous Petition (MP) contending that the Tribunal failed to consider arguments on ground Nos.8 to 19, as observed in para 15 of the Tribunal order. The assessee argued that the Tribunal should have considered these grounds, claiming it to be an apparent mistake under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue, however, argued that there was no apparent mistake in the Tribunal order. The Tribunal noted that ground Nos.1 and 2 were rejected as not pressed, while ground Nos.3 to 7 were discussed, including issues related to additions and depreciation. The Tribunal found that the remaining ground Nos.8 to 19 were not pressed as no arguments were advanced by the assessee's AR regarding these grounds. Despite contentions during the MP hearing, no evidence was provided to establish that arguments were indeed raised on these grounds. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the MP, stating that there was no merit in the assessee's claim.

2. The Tribunal's decision to dismiss ground Nos.8 to 19 as not pressed was based on the lack of evidence supporting the assessee's contention that arguments were made on these grounds during the appeal hearing. The Tribunal examined its log book and the documents submitted by the assessee, finding no record or evidence of arguments presented on these grounds. While the assessee submitted a Paper Book, it only contained comments on specific issues related to sale and lease back transactions, not on the grounds in question. Despite the assessee's verbal contentions during the MP hearing, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing concrete evidence to support the claim that arguments were raised on specific grounds. As no such evidence was produced, the Tribunal upheld its decision to dismiss the MP, thereby concluding that the miscellaneous petition filed by the assessee lacked merit.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment upheld the dismissal of the miscellaneous petition filed by the assessee, as there was no substantiated evidence to support the claim that arguments were advanced on the disputed grounds. The decision highlighted the necessity of providing concrete evidence during legal proceedings to validate assertions made by the parties involved.