9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been aware of the discrepancy and once he came to know of the same on receipt of the order of the Tribunal, he took steps to obtain the necessary certificates from the bank and produced them before the Tribunal along with the application for modification of the order of the Tribunal. It was further submitted that no prejudice would be caused to the Revenue if the certificates are directed to be examined by the Assessing Officer and a fresh decision be taken in the interest of justice. Held that:- matter remanded back to AO for due consideration of the documents sought to be placed on record through the Miscellaneous Application before the Tribunal. - W.P.(C) 1687/2012 - - - Dated:- 21-11-2012 - MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. R.V. EASWAR J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst the order of the CIT(Appeals), the petitioner preferred a further appeal to the Income Tax appellate Tribunal ( Tribunal for short) in IT(SS) No.40/Del/2008. The Tribunal examined the matter in great detail and ultimately allowed the appeal in part, the relief given being (a) the acceptance of the petitioner s claim that out of the cash of Rs.4 lacs found in the locker, a sum of Rs.1.50 lacs may be treated as having come out of the sale proceeds of the petitioner s old car and thus explained; (b) acceptance of a sum of Rs.45,000/- as explained, out of the cash of Rs.1,02,400/- found from the drawer of the assessee during the search and (c) restoration of the issue relating to the addition of the bank deposits of Rs.17,000/- to the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d explained the alleged discrepancy both in respect of the deposit with Canara Bank and deposit with Punjab National Bank. It was submitted that the alleged discrepancy was not pointed out by the Bench to the petitioner in the course of the hearing before the Tribunal and, therefore, the petitioner did not have an opportunity of explaining the same. A prayer was, therefore, made for modifying the order of the Tribunal on account of a mistake apparent from the record or a direction restoring the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for being decided afresh in the light of the evidence adduced by the petitioner. 6. The Tribunal by order dated 21st April, 2011 in MA No.12/Del/2011 dismissed the application filed by the petitioner on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... course of hearing in this regard and hence, the Tribunal rejected the explanation on this basis that the FDs found in search are different FDs. The assessee had submitted a paper book of 61 pages in the course of hearing before us but in the paper book, the assessee has not submitted a photocopy of this FD of Punjab National Bank or of Canara Bank. Hence, even if some mistake are there in the order of Tribunal, these are not apparent mistakes which can be rectified under sec. 254(2). The request of the assessee in Misc. Application amounts to review of Tribunal s order which is not permitted under sec. 254(2) and hence, this Misc. Application of the assessee is liable to be rejected. We order accordingly. 7. We have considered the rival c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
