Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh
Acit, Ludhiana vs M/S Sunder Mal Sat Pal, Mukatsar on 19 March, 2021
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ "बी", च डीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
CHANDIGARH BENCH 'B' , CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI R.L. NEGI ,JUDICIAL MEMBER
MA Nos.6 to 9/Chd/2019
In
आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.154 to 157/Chd/2013
नधा रण वष / Assessment Years : 2005-06 to 2008-09
The A.C.I.T., बनाम M/s Sunder Mal Sat Pal,
Central Circle-III, Shop No.2, New Grain Market,
Ludhiana. Muktsar.
थायी लेखा सं./ PAN:AAJFS3902J
अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent
नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA.
राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
सन
ु वाई क तार$ख/Date of Hearing : 05.03.2021
उदघोषणा क तार$ख/Date of Pronouncement: 19.03.2021
(Hearing through webex)
आदे श/ORDER
Per Anna pur na G upta, Account ant Member :
Vi d e the p r e sen t Miscellaneous Applications the Revenue has sought recalling the consolidated order of the Tr i b u n a l dated 15.06.2018 in I TA Nos.154 to 2 MA Nos.6 to 9/Chd/2019 A.Ys 2005-06 to 2008-09 157/Chd/2013 in the case of the assessee for four as sess me nt years i.e. assessment years 20 05-0 6 to 2008 -
09.
2. The recall is being sought for identical reasons in all the four Miscellaneous Ap pl ications, bei ng that the I TA T had acted beyond its jurisdiction while adjudicating the validity of the reference made by the AO for special audit as per the pr ovisions of se ction 1 42(2A) of the Inc ome Tax Act,19 61 (in sh ort 'the A ct') in the impugned appe als. The Revenue, for the said proposition, has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Kumar Vs. DCI T (20 06 ) 1 57 Taxman 168 ( SC) and Sahara India (Fir m) Vs. CI T ( 20 0 8) 1 69 Taxman 32 8 (SC).
3. During the course of hearing before us it was pointed out at bar to the Ld. DR that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in the case of Consulting Engineering Services Priv ate Li mited Vs. I TA T & Another in WP (C)77 34 /2017 dated 01.09.2017 ,on being seized with the identical issue whether the challenge to the order u/s 142(2A) could be raised b e f o r e t h e I TA T i n v i e w of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sahara India (Firm) Vs. CIT (supra), had held that the observation made in that 3 MA Nos.6 to 9/Chd/2019 A.Ys 2005-06 to 2008-09 decision was in the peculiar facts of that case and was not meant to be a general observation applicable across the b oard for all case s. That at para 9 of the or der the Hon'ble H igh Cour t had cate gori cally held that the I TA T ought to have entertained the additional grounds pertaining to the validity of reference made u/s 142(2A) of the Act.
4. The Ld. DR, after going through the aforesaid order, fairly agreed that the issue had been considered as above by the Hon'ble High Court in the aforesaid decision.
5. In view of the above , we do not f ind any me ri t in the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue since the ad judicati on of the referen ce to speci al audi t by the I TA T has been held to be well within its jurisdiction by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Consulting Engi neering Service s Pri vate Limi te d Vs. I TA T & A nother (supra), that too after considering the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sahara India(supra). Th e refore, with regard to the same, there is no mistake in the order o f t h e I TA T. 4 MA Nos.6 to 9/Chd/2019 A.Ys 2005-06 to 2008-09
6. In the result, all the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue are, therefore, dismissed.
O r de r p r o n o u n ce d o n 1 9 . 0 3 . 2 0 21 .
Sd/- Sd/-
(R.L. NEGI) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA)
Judicial Member Accountant Member
दनांक /Dated: 19th March, 2021
*रती*
आदे श क त*ल+प अ,े+षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent
3. आयकर आयु-त/ CIT
4. आयकर आयु-त (अपील)/ The CIT(A)
5. +वभागीय त न0ध, आयकर अपील$य आ0धकरण, च2डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH
6. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदे शानस ु ार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar