2022 (10) TMI 1002 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification of mistake - Assessee contends that Ground Nos. 3 to 5 for A.Y. 2008-09 where it was pointed out that the said ground remained from being decided in our order - HELD THAT - Vide order Ground Nos. 3 to 5 has inadvertently remained undecided, though it was argued by both the sides. In view of the above, the order dated 09.10.2019 is recalled. The appeal is ordered to be restored to its original no. in situ. For merits, it shall now, come up for hearing on 13.10.2022

Summary

Issues:
1. Rectification of error in judgment regarding Ground Nos. 3 to 5 in ITA No. 508/Asr/2016 for A.Y. 2008-09.
2. Justification for recalling the order dated 09.10.2019.
3. Restoration of the appeal to its original position for further hearing.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Amritsar, delivered by Sh. Anikesh Banerjee, JM, addresses a Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee concerning the omission to decide Ground Nos. 3 to 5 in ITA No. 508/Asr/2016 for A.Y. 2008-09 in the previous order dated 09.10.2019. The assessee contended that these grounds were not adjudicated despite being raised and argued by both parties. The Tribunal acknowledged the error and rectified it by accepting the contents of the assessee's application, which highlighted the relevance and existence of the unaddressed grounds. The Tribunal recalled the order dated 09.10.2019 and restored the appeal to its original position for further consideration on 13.10.2022. The Miscellaneous Application, No. 46/Asr/2016, was allowed, emphasizing the importance of addressing all raised grounds and providing a fair opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

This judgment underscores the fundamental principle of ensuring that all grounds raised by parties are adequately considered and decided upon in a judicial proceeding. It highlights the significance of rectifying errors that may lead to the omission of crucial issues in the adjudication process. By granting the assessee the opportunity to have Ground Nos. 3 to 5 reconsidered and heard, the Tribunal upholds the principles of natural justice and fair hearing. The decision to recall the previous order and restore the appeal for further hearing demonstrates the commitment to upholding procedural fairness and addressing any oversights promptly. The judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of thoroughness and diligence in judicial proceedings to uphold the integrity and effectiveness of the legal system.