9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1584X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not rectified. The mistakes alleged to be crept in the order which the assessee has claimed to be apparent on record have been mentioned in paragraphs 5 to 8 of the application which, for the sake of convenience are reproduced as under: "5. In paragraph 7, page 5, Honourable Tribunal held that Appellant derived no benefit as quid pro quo for allowing user of plant and machinery. With utmost respect, Honourable Tribunal has not properly appreciated arrangement between Appellant and Defiance Knitting Industries Private Limited [DKIPL] which is expounded in letter dated 29.12.2009 [PAGE 23 - 29 OF PAPERBOOK FILED] and extracted In assessment order paragraph 4, page 2 thereto. On a gleaning of foregoing explanation, it is palpable that plant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... airs of group concerns were cooked up so as to reduce incidence of tax......" It is respectfully submitted that even during course of survey operations conducted by revenue no adverse material was found much less which leads to conclusion that Applicant has cooked up affairs of group concerns. In the premises, with utmost respect, Honourable Tribunal has gone into issues not raised even by AG. It is respectfully submitted that if Appellant desired to mitigate its tax burden it could have shifted entire exports to DKIPL and completely avoided payment of taxes. Moreover, all inter-company sales and purchases are at arm's length and AO has not invoked Section 40A(2). Without prejudice, Applicant was not afforded opportunity to meet aforesaid h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied upon certain case laws to stress that the wrongful assumption of fact amounts to mistake apparent on the record and further that the genuineness or authenticity of the transaction in question was not an issue before the Tribunal and further that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to go beyond the assessment order. He has further submitted that the Tribunal has also failed to consider the authority of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of "G.R. Shipping Ltd" ITA No.598 of 2009 decided on 24.7.2009, copy of which has been placed at page 29 of the paper book filed with the present miscellaneous application. 4. A perusal of the above pointed mistakes by the assessee reveals that the same do not fall in the definition of any 'm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee, the lower authorities discarded the contentions of the assessee and made the disallowance. So there was neither any wrongful assumption of fact nor the Tribunal has gone beyond its jurisdiction while deciding the appeal of the assessee on merits. 6. So far the order of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of G.R. Shipping Ltd. (supra) is concerned, it may be observed that the dispute before the Hon'ble High Court was regarding the eligibility of depreciation on the assets which were used by the assessee in that case in the previous year but some of the assets could not be used by the assessee during the subsequent assessment year but the same were entered into the block of assets. The Hon'ble High Court upheld the finding of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
