9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 969X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplication. For the sake of clarify and effective adjudication the relevant contents of the application are reproduced as under: "The mistakes/errors are that, while discussing the following grounds raised in the appeal: a) Validity of re-assessment proceedings u/s 147/148 of I.T. Act (Ground No. 2 and 3 of the grounds raised before Hon'ble ITAT) b) Source of investment by the assessee (Ground No. 8 and 9 of the grounds of appeal raised before Hon'ble ITAT). c) That the amount of investment/undisclosed income should be Rs. 3029000 or Rs. 1500000 (Ground No. 6 and 7 of the grounds of appeal raised before Hon'ble ITAT). The facts have been stated by Hon'ble ITAT in Para 2 of its order. These facts are not full no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on by both the appellate authorities and are silent on this issue. This ground being the primary and important ground for assuming jurisdiction u/s 147/148 of I.T. Act should have been decided first, as it is most important and vital to the case. The above point in writing was specifically raised before the Ld. CIT(A) in ground No. 1 and Hon'ble ITAT in ground No. 1,2,3 and 4. Before the Hon'ble ITAT, the above aspect was specifically pointed out by counsel of the assessee and pleaded that reasons may kindly be seen for income to escape assessment. In absence of reasons, it was stated that looking at the order, one could ignore the reasons were AIR information from stamp authorities/purchase deed that the entire investment of Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of his order and paragraphs 4.11). It was pleaded before Hon'ble ITAT that the money came from her husband as has been discussed in Para-4.6 (3.1) page 5 of Ld. CIT(A) order. It was stated that the assessee being the house wife having no source of income, money came from the husband, who paid the seller directly from his bank account. There is no finding to disbelieve this assertion by the Hon'ble ITAT in paragraphs 5 of its order and instead of Rs. 1500000, the total value as per stamp collector was added in the hands of the lady assessee. Undisputed facts from record i.e. sale deed the property was purchased as half owner, the other half owner by mother-in-law. This aspect can be seen from the paragraphs 4.6 of Ld. CIT(A) order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TAT dated 01-01-2019 may be recalled/ amended/rectified or set aside and thereafter the appeal may be fixed for hearing to decide all above issues in accordance of law. In view of the above, a prayer is being made to set aside/recall the order." 3. On the contrary, learned DR opposed the submissions and submitted that the application so filed by the assessee is beyond the scope of Section 254(2) of the Act as by way of the present application the assessee is trying to seek review of the order. 4. On the contrary learned counsel for the assessee in rejoinder stated that there is an apparent mistake on record which requires rectification. It is conte4nded that the Tribunal failed to take note of the fact that the AO has made addition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
