Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Ashok P. Shah, vs Acit - 22(2), on 26 April, 2017
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,, मुंबई " ऐ"" खंडपीठ मे Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -"A"Bench Mumbai सव ी राजे ,लेखा सद य एवं अमरजीत सह, याियक सद य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member िविवध आवेदन सं / MA No.116/Mum/2016 (Arising out of आयकर अपील सं/ ITA No.2163/Mum/2011) िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year-2006-07) Shri Ashok P. Shah ACIT-Circle-22(2) C/o. Friendship, 112, Arun Bazar, Station Mumbai.
Road, Santacruz(W),Mumbai-400 054. Vs. PAN:ALJPS 3432 L (आवेदक /Applicant) ( यथ / Respondent) Revenue by: Shri Rajguru M.V.-DR Assessee by: Shri V.P. Kothari-AR सुनवाई क तारीख / Date of Hearing: 24.03. 2017 घोषणा क तारीख / Date of Pronouncement: 26.04.2017 आयकर अिधिनयम,1961 अिधिनयम क धारा 254(1)के के अ तग त आदे श Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद य, य राजे के अनुसार/ ार PER Rajendra A.M.-
Vide its application,dated 24.05.16,the assessee has stated that there were certain mistakes in order of Tribunal,dated 29.02.16,that same were to be rectified as per provisions of section 254(2) of the Act.In his application the assessee has stated that while deciding Ground No.4 the Tribunal had mentioned the amount of stamp duty payable at Rs.2.50 lakhs as against Rs. 25 lakhs,that the assessee had paid a additional sum of Rs.24.00 lakhs on account of stamp duty in addition to Rs.25 lakhs paid already,that while deciding the appeal the issue was not dealt by the Tribunal,that the Tribunal had relied upon the case of Chandresh P.Shah while deciding the issue,that the facts of the that case were totally different and were not comparable with the facts of the assessee,that in that matter the issue was head of the income under which income was to be assessed i.e. under the head 'short term capital gain' or 'income from other sources', that the Tribunal had not dealt with issue raised by him.
2.During the course of hearing before us the Authorised Representative (AR) reiterated the arguments that are part of the miscellaneous application and stated that issue raised before the Tribunal was not adjudicated upon.The Departmental Representative (DR) stated that there was no mistake in the order passed by the Tribunal.
3.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us.We find that there was a typographical error in mentioning the amount of stamp duty. The issue was of about Rs.25.00 lakhs and not Rs.2.5 lakhs as claimed in the application.We also find that Ground MA/116/M/16-AshokP.Shah No.4 remained unadjuducated, i.e. the main issue was not dealt with.Therefore, we recall our order for the limited purpose of deciding Ground No.4 again.Registry is directed to fix the case before the regular bench for deciding Ground No.4 only.
As a result MA filed by the assessee stands allowed. प रणामतः िनधा रती ारा दािखल कया गया िविवध आवदेन प मंजूर कया जाता है . Order pronounced in the open court on 26th April, 2017. आदेश क घोषणा खुले यायालय म दनांक 26 अ ैल , 2017 को क गई ।
Sd/- Sd/-
(अमरजीत सह / Amarjit Singh ) (राजे / Rajendra)
याियक सद य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
मुंबई Mumbai; दनांक/Dated : 26.04..2017.
Jv.Sr.PS.
आदेश क of the Order forwarded to :
ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy
1.Appellant /अपीलाथ 2. Respondent / यथ
3.The concerned CIT(A)/संब अपीलीय आयकर आयु#, 4.The concerned CIT /संब आयकर आयु#
5.DR "A " Bench, ITAT, Mumbai /िवभागीय ितिनिध, खंडपीठ,आ.अ. याया.मुंबई
6.Guard File/गाड फाईल स यािपत ित //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार Dy./Asst. Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /ITAT, Mumbai.
2