2021 (3) TMI 760 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification u/s 254 - Contention of assessee that the ITAT has felt into apparent error while upholding the disallowance of commission payment by not taking into account the document which were submitted - contention of the assessee that the ITAT has committed error in appreciating the evidences by way of paperbook which was duly submitted and tribunal mistakenly noted that no evidence has been submitted in support of the claim - HELD THAT - As as reflected in adjudication by the tribunal as quoted in the above submissions, the tribunal has mistakenly noted that nothing has been submitted before tribunal. There is an apparent mistake inasmuch as the tribunal has missed out the paperbook submitted. Moreover, the last ground has also remained unadjudicated. Hence, agree that the order of the tribunal deserves to be recalled. Hence, the order of the tribunal is recalled. Registry is directed to fix the appeal in normal course on 17.05.2021. Issue notice to the parties. Accordingly, this miscellaneous application filed by the assessee stands allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of mistake u/s. 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the order of ITAT Mumbai in ITA No. 799/Mum/2019 for assessment year 2013-14.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Disallowance of Commission Payment
The assessee sought rectification of a mistake in the ITAT order regarding the disallowance of commission payments made during the assessment year 2013-14. The Assessing Officer disallowed the commission expenditure, considering it non-genuine, as the notice u/s 133(6) to verify the claim returned unserved. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, stating the applicant failed to substantiate the claim. However, the applicant submitted evidence including credit notes, PAN, and bank statements to establish the genuineness of transactions. The ITAT erroneously noted no evidence was submitted, leading to the rectification application. The tribunal acknowledged the mistake, recalling the order and directing the appeal to be fixed for further consideration.

Issue 2: Unadjudicated Ground
The applicant also raised a ground regarding the disallowance of expenses under various heads, which the tribunal failed to adjudicate. The applicant contended that this unadjudicated ground constituted a mistake apparent from the record. The tribunal agreed with this contention, recognizing the oversight in not addressing this ground. Consequently, the tribunal recalled its order, allowing the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee. The registry was directed to schedule the appeal for further proceedings.

This detailed analysis highlights the rectification sought by the assessee regarding the disallowance of commission payments and the unadjudicated ground in the ITAT Mumbai order for the assessment year 2013-14. The tribunal acknowledged the errors, recalled the order, and directed further proceedings, ensuring a fair consideration of the applicant's claims.