9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1419X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lies in case where, there is a mistake apparent on record in the order of the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal cannot be assailed on merits in the garb of Miscellaneous Application u/s 254(2) of the Act. Reliance in this respect can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of 'Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Ramesh Electric And Trading Co.' [ 1992 (11) TMI 32 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] wherein while relying upon the decision of T. S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Brothers' [ 1971 (8) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT ] and further relying upon the decisions of the various High Courts has categorically held that the power of rectification under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act can be exercised only when the mistak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s. 14A of the Act cannot exceed the amount of exempt income; that the amendment to section 14A of the Act seeks to overrule the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del.); that the observation of the Tribunal that disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act cannot be made in absence of exempt income or has to be restricted to exempt income has not been settled by the Hon ble Apex Court is not correct rather by the dismissal of the SLP by the Hon ble Supreme Court the issue gets settled; that the explanation to a provision cannot extend to main provision and further that the legal position of section 14A of the Act as established cannot be simply ruled out by the amendment made vide Finance Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly on 3rd November 2022 vide Circular No 23/2022 Explanatory Notes to The Provisions of the Finance Act, 2022 has stated in respect of both amendments made in sub-section (1) of section 14A and the insertion of explanation in section 14A that this amendment is effective from 1st April 2022. Hence the effective date of both amendments is similarly identically worded. Thus because of this, an inadvertent mistake has crept in the order of the Tribunal dated 06/07/2022. An extract of the Circular is placed in the Paper Book dated 07/11/2022 on pages Nos. 1 - 2. 2. After the order dated 0/10//2022 of the Hon'ble ITAT the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) v. Era Infrastructure (India) L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder of the Hon'ble Tribunal dated 06/07/2022. It is my humble prayer that the order of the Hon ble Tribunal may be recalled either totally or partially to rectify the mistake for which the Appellant will suffer an irreparable huge loss. 4. A perusal of the contents of the Misc. Application and the written submission filed by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee would reveal that the assessee in this case wants to assail the order of the Tribunal dated 06.07.2022 on factual matrix as well as on law for which the proper remedy is to file the appeal before the Hon ble High court. The issues raised by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, in our view, do not constitute mistake apparent on record. This Tribunal has limited jurisdiction u/s. 254 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. If the well reported decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court, which is in public domain, has been referred to in the order and even the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has failed to demonstrate how the said decision was wrongly referred to and how the same has caused any prejudice to the assessee that in our view, would not constitute any error apparent on record. Thus, in our view neither any prejudice has been caused to the assessee nor any mistake apparent from record had occurred in the said order. So far as the reliance placed by the Ld. Counsel on the subsequent decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Era Infrastructure India Ltd. (supra) is concerned, we note that the said decision of the Hon ble Delhi High court is sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... having limited power u/s. 254(2) of the Act. 6. The application u/s 254(2) of the Act lies in case where, there is a mistake apparent on record in the order of the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal cannot be assailed on merits in the garb of Miscellaneous Application u/s 254(2) of the Act. Reliance in this respect can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of 'Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Ramesh Electric And Trading Co.' (1993) 203 ITR 497 (Bom.), wherein the Hon'ble High Court while relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of T. S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Brothers' [1971] 82 ITR 50 and further relying upon the decisions of the various High Courts has cate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
