9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon'ble ITAT, it was noticed that the addition u/s.69C of the I. T. Act was restricted to Rs.31,46,500/- instead of the original addition made by the AO of Rs.1,32,56,366/- on the basis of the chart prepared (copy enclosed) during the course of hearing before the ITAT. Now the said chart has been obtained and after perusal of the same, it is seen that the amount of Rs.31,46,000/- has been arrived at by including the following amounts:- i) amount reflected in Col. No.3 i.e. paid for expenses which has total of Rs.14,69,500/- plus amount reflected in Col. No.5 i.e. remarks where it is clarified as to on what ground the amount was returned i.e. borrowed funds or reimbursement of expenses incurred on assessee's behalf duly reduced by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Act. Hence, it is evident that the Hon'ble ITAT have allowed such deduction without appreciation of the facts of the transactions & therefore, the decision of ITAT is perverse of this issue and is required to be recall and rectify the mistake. 2. Before us, learned DR, reiterated the submissions made in the application and further submitted that the chart which was referred and considered by the Hon'ble Tribunal for granting relief was not correct and thereby the relief which was granted was also not correct and therefore there is mistake apparent which needs to be corrected and therefore the order by recalled. The Ld. A.R. on the other hand objected to the submissions of the Id. DR. He submitted that at the time of hearing of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne which is patent, obvious and whose discovery is not dependent on argument. Further a mistake which may be discovered by a complicated process of investigation, argument or proof cannot be rectified u/s. 254(2). Further, if the prayer made by the Revenue in its Miscellaneous Application is accepted, it will amount to review of our order. The law is settled that the Tribunal have no power to review the order. 5. In the case of Perfetti Van Melle India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 595 (Del) the Hon'ble High Court has concluded that Assessee cannot be allowed to reopen and reargue the whole matter in the garb of rectification under section. 254(2). It has held as under:- "It is well settled that an oversight of a fact cannot constit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
