9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 1209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntertain the second application on the same set of facts . We draw support from the decision in the case of CIT vs. Chemical and Allied Products (2006 (11) TMI 175 - ALLAHABAD High Court) where the Hon’ble High Court has held that when Tribunal having rejected the first application filed under section 254(2) on the ground that there was no mistake apparent on the face of record in the order of Tribunal, it was not open to the Tribunal to entertain the second application which was filed on the same set of facts and recall its appellate order on the alleged premise that there was an error apparent in the order. The Hon’ble High Court has further held that the Assessee cannot be allowed to be permitted to reopen and reargue the whole matter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts on record and the legal contention which goes to the root of the matter which has remained to be considered and thus there is apparent error from record in terms of Section 254(2) of the Act and therefore the M.A. filed by the Revenue be allowed. 3. Ld. A.R. on the other hand submitted that by order dated 07.09.2012 the Tribunal had dismissed the appeal of Revenue (ITA No. 2698 2699/A/2009 dated 07.09.2012 for A.Y. 2006-07 2007-08). Against the aforesaid order of Hon ble Tribunal, Revenue had filed M.A. bearing no. 197 198/Ahd/2013 which was also dismissed by the Hon ble Tribunal by order dated 26.09.2014. The ld. A.R. submitted that against the dismissal of the aforesaid M.As, Revenue has again preferred the present M.A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant is to approach the Tribunal by way of appropriate application and request the Tribunal to give the findings on all the points which are raised and argued in the appeal. The appellant will approach the Tribunal within four weeks from today with such an application. If such an application is filed, the Tribunal will decide the same within four thereafter. If the application is not filed within stipulated time, the appellant will not get the benefit of this order. It is needless to say that this court has not examined the matter or expressed any opinion on merits. With the above directions, this appeal stands disposed of. At the time of hearing of the present M.As. preferred by the Revenue after passing the order dated 21 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal dated 7.9.2012 (supra), which could be said to be a mistake apparent from record, and accordingly, the present MAs. preferred by the Revenue are devoid of any merit, and are accordingly dismissed. 5. We find that against the aforesaid M.As. which was dismissed by Tribunal, Revenue has again preferred the present M.As. which are on the same set of facts and through which the Revenue wants us to recall the appellate order on the alleged premise, that there was an error apparent in the order. We find that while disposing of the M.As. vide order dated 26.09.2014 it was concluded by the Tribunal that there was no mistake apparent in the order of the Tribunal and in such a situation, we are of the view that it is not open to Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
