Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (9) TMI 1538

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t there cannot be two owners of the same parcel of gold. HELD THAT: - Error of judgement cannot be described as a mistake apparent from record. In such a situation, the aggrieved party should approach the higher forum for the redressal of the issue involved in the dispute. ITAT has passed the order after due application of mind. Thus, there cannot be any apparent mistake in the order of ITAT within the meaning of provisions of section 254(2) of the Act. If we reconsider the arguments of the Revenue, the same shall amount to a review of our own order which is not permissible. There is no mistake apparent from the record in the order of ITAT requiring revision u/s 254(2) of the Act. Hence, the MA filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed. - .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he hands of sender, Sandeep Gupta, Prop. Brijmohan Jewellers, the appellant, Jaliluddin J.A. Shekh is the 'owner' of gold, following facts on record have not been addressed by the Ld. ITAT: (i) The date of booking of gold parcel is 24/10/2017 and the date of dispatch from Hyderabad is 25/10/2017. This parcel was in transit from 25/10/2017 till 27/10/2017 and reached Rajkot on 27/10/2017. Seized gold was found inside this parcel. Whereas, the appellant has contended that he purchased gold from Sandeep Gupta, Prop. Brijmohan Jewellers on 26/10/2017. Simultaneously Shri Sandeep Gupta has also contended that he has sold gold to the appellant on 26/10/2017 and has produced evidences which are on record. Ld. ITAT has not addressed this an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ome Tax Officer, M.R.SHAHANDMS.SOMAGOKANI,JJ., TAX APPEAL NOS. 847 to 849 of 2013 OCTOBER 21, 2013. Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961- Appellate Tribunal- Order of [Duties of Tribunal-Whether whenever any decision has been relied upon and/or cited by assessee and/or any party, Tribunal is bound to consider and/or deal with same and opine whether in facts and circumstances of particular case, same will be applicable or not- Held, yes- Whether, therefore, where Tribunal while disposing of appeal, failed to consider applicability of a decision cited by assessee, impugned order passed by Tribunal was to be set aside and, matter was to remanded back for disposal afresh- Held, yes [Para 4] [Matter remanded] Though, no case law citation is i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ined the apparent mistakes through judicial pronouncements. As such, the apparent mistake refers to those errors or inconsistency that is evident from the face of the documents/order of the authority in respect of which two views are not possible. The apparent mistake can be in the form of calculation, data, wrong assumption of facts, misinterpretation of the provisions of law, misreporting of income, deduction, or any other relevant information. However, the mistakes which require arguments, debate, evaluation of law/facts in its determination, the same cannot be referred as mistake apparent from the record. Likewise, in the event of any order given by the ITAT which is alleged to be based on the wrong assumption of facts or law, but after .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rther the fact that seized gold was in transit with courier service from 24 October 2017. Based on the above, a doubt crept in the mind of the AO and therefore the AO held documentary evidences produced with regard to purchase of gold dated 26 October 2017 are afterthought and futile effort to give color of genuineness to an unaccounted transaction. In the result the addition was made in the hands of the assessee on protective basis viz a viz the additions in the hands of the Sandeep Gupta (M/s Brij Mohan Jewellers) on substantive basis. Admittedly, the facts brought on record by the AO are crucial but we note that such mismatch was never confronted to the assessee for his rebuttal. Thus, it appears to us that some details has been used by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates