Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh
M/S State Bank Of India (Sucessor To ... vs Acit, Circle, Patiala on 14 June, 2019
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ "बी ", च डीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
CHANDIGARH BENCH 'B' , CHANDIGARH
ी संजय गग , याय क सद य एवं डा. बी.आर.आर. कुमार, लेखा सद य
BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
MA Nos.250 & 251/Chd/2018
In
आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.384 & 385/Chd/2008
नधा रण वष /Assessment Years : 1999-2000 & 2000-01
M/s State Bank of India बनाम The A.C.I.T.,
(Successor to State Bank of Circle Patiala.
Patiala), Patiala.
थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AACCS0143D
अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent
नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by : Shri C.Naresh, CA
राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manjit Singh Sr.DR
सन
ु वाई क तार$ख/Date of Hearing : 12.03.2019
उदघोषणा क तार$ख/Date of Pronouncement: 14.06. 2019
आदे श/ORDER
Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Accountant Member:
The present Miscellaneous Applications have been moved by the assessee, State Bank of India pleading therein that a mistake apparent on record has occurred in the con soli dated orde r d ated 3 .8.20 18 of this Tr ib unal, passed in I TA Nos.384 & 385/Chd/2008, relevant to as sess me nt years 1999 -200 0 & 20 00-2 001 respectivel y. It has been ple aded i n the ap plicati on that the Tri bunal vi de 2 para-3 of the said consolidated order has disposed off ground Nos.1, 2 & 4 of the appeal for assessment year 1999-2000 and ground Nos.1 & 2 of the appeal for as sess me nt year 200 0-2 001, pe rtai ni ng to the validi ty of issue of notice u/s 14 8 of the Income Tax Act, 1 961 ( in short 'the Act') for reopening of the assessment u/s 147 of the Act as 'not pressed' by the assessee. It has been pleaded that the assessee had duly pressed the aforesaid g r o u n d s . H o w e v e r , t h e Tr i b u n a l i n a d v e r t e n t l y n o t e d t h a t these grounds were not pressed and hence, dismissed the same without adjudication. The Ld.Counsel for the asssessee in this respect has made following written submission:
"1. In the order of Hon'ble ITAT, in ITA No. 384 & 385/Chd/2008 for A.Y. 1999-2000 & 2000-2001 dated 03/08/2018, it was held in Para no. 3, Page 2 as under. "Ground No. 1, 2 and 4 for the A.Y. 1999-2000 and Ground No. 1 and 2 for A. Y. 2000-2001 pertaining to issue of notice under section 148 are not pressed by the assessee therefore no adjudication is required"
2. The appellant in this regard respectfully submits that this case was heard on a number of occasions starting from 2015. At the time of initial hearings in 2015, the AR in the grounds of appeal of the Hon'ble members for the AY 2000-01 had indicated against ground no.l relating to jurisdiction, that the ground is not pressed as the same was not permitted by Committee on Disputes. However, in AY 1999-00 there was no such issue.
3. However, in subsequent hearings, based on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Electronics Corporation of India Ltd (332 ITR 58) which had 3 held that the approval of Committee on Disputes was no longer required for pursuing the appeals before honorable ITAT & courts, this issue was argued by AR as the Committee permitted the issue to be agitated.
4. The AR had submitted during various hearings that the reopening was bad in law for both AY 1999-00 and 2000-01 and this issue was extensively argued on various occasions and even when the matter was finally heard by your Honor's on June 5th, 2018. The paper book that had been furnished by the appellant also contained various documents on the issue of reopening such as notice of reopening, reasons for reopening, the submissions made to assessing officer at the time of original assessment etc. The AR had elaborately argued, based on paper books, to contest that reopening was bad in law.
5. However, while passing the order, this ground was decided as not pressed for both the assessment years probably for the reasonthatinAY2000-01,against the ground relating to jurisdiction, it was mentioned as not pressed as the same was not permitted by Committee on Disputes even though this issue was argued in all hearings.
6. The appellant respectfully submits that it was never the intention to withdraw the above ground and the error in AY 2000-01'hadoccurredonaccount of the genuine doubt caused about the requirement of approval from Committee on disputes.
7. In view of the above, the appellant respectfully prays that the order of Hon'ble Tribunal on this issue may kindly be recalled for both the years and adjudicated upon in order to render justice."
2. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, has submitted that no mistake apparent on record has occurred in the consol id ated order d ated 3 .8 .2 018 of this Tr ib unal.
3. We have considered the rival contentions. A perusal of the relevant grounds of the appeal Nos.1, 2 & 4 raised in I TA No.384/Chd/2008 relevant to assessment year 4 1999-2000, vide which the assessee has challenged the validity of the reopening of the assessment u/s 147 of the Act read with section 148 of the Act, reveals a note has been given as 'not pressed' against the said grounds. In respect of identical grounds taken in I TA No.385/Chd/2008 relevant to assessment year 2000-01, following note has been given against ground Nos.1 &2, under the signature of the counsel for the assessee:
'Not pressed as not permitted by COD'
4. As revealed from the written arguments above that initially the assessee had not pressed the aforesaid grounds as the s ame were not permitted by the 'Committee on Disputes'. However, subsequently, as held in the of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. (supra), the approval of the Committee on Disputes was not re qu ired for pursuing the ap peals before the I .T.A. T. and Courts. The assessee, accordingly, duly pressed those grounds. We have also referred to our logbook and find that the arguments were addressed by the Ld.Counsel for the asssessee on the legal issues relevant to the validity of the reopening of the assessment. The above said grounds inadvertently were dismissed as 'not pressed' 5 because of the earlier note put on against the aforesaid grounds. Earlier, the Committee on Disputes had not permitted to raise the aforesaid grounds. However, later on since the asse ssee had become entitled to raise and press these legal issues, which go to the root of the case, the Ld.Coun sel for the assessee, duly pressed the same during arguments. In view of the above, a mistake apparent on record has occurre d in the order of the Tr ib un al i n not ad ju di cati ng the aforesaid legal i ssues on merits. The consolidated order dated 3.8.2018 of this Tr ib un al is, therefore, recalled to the li mited extent and purp ose for adjud i cation of the gr ound Nos .1 , 2 & 4 of I TA No.384/Chd/2008 and ground Nos.1 & 2 of I TA No.385/Chd/2008 relating to the legal issues of validity of reopening of the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act. H owever , the finding of the Tri b unal give n on me rits in relation to other issues will remain as such. If the assessee succeeds on the legal issues relating to the validity of the reopening of the assessment, the consequence will be that the findings of the Tri b unal give n on the merits of the case will be rendered academic in nature and will not be operating. However, if this legal issue is decided against the assessee, the findings of the 6 Tr ib un al given on me rits w ill re main oper atin g. Wi th the above observations, these Miscellaneous Applications of the asse ssee are here by al lowed . The main appe al s are dire cted to be fixed by the Registry in regular course for adjudication on the legal issues as directed above. A copy of thi s order be also pl aced in t he main f iles beari ng I TA Nos.384 & 385/Chd/2008 relating to assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-01.
5. In the result, both the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessees are treated as allowed.
O r de r p r o n o u n ce d i n t he O p e n C ou r t .
Sd/- Sd/-
संजय गग डा. बी.आर.आर.
(SANJAY GARG ) (Dr.B.R.R.Kumar)
याय क सद य/Judicial Member लेखा सद य/Accountant Member
(दनांक /Dated: 14.06.2019
*रती*
आ दे श क त*ल+प अ,े+षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent
3. आ यकर आ यु-त/ CIT
4. आ यकर आ यु-त (अपील)/ The CIT(A)
5. +वभागीय त न0ध, आ यकर अपील$य आ 0धकरण, च2डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH
6. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आ दे शानस ु ार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar