Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Acit, Chennai vs Poompuhar Shipping Corporation ... on 31 December, 2018
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, "बी" ायपीठ, चे ई
IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH, CHENNAI
ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद एवं ी धु ु आर.एल रे ी, ाियक सद के सम
Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member &
Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member
M.P. No. 308/Chny/2017
[In I.T.A. No.537/Chny/2013]
Assessment Year : 2007-08
The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, M/s. Poompuhar Shipping
International Taxation-2, Vs. Corporation Ltd.,
Room No.409, 4th Floor, Tower-1, 692, Anna Salai, Nandanam,
BSNL Building, Greams Road, Chennai-600 035.
Chennai-600 006.
[PAN: AAACP 4383 J]
(अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( थ /Respondent)
Department by : Mrs.R. Anita, JCIT
Assessee by : Mr. Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate
सु नवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 26.10.2018
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2018
आदे श /O R D E R
PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
By means of present Miscellaneous Petition, the Revenue seeks to recall the order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. No.537/Mds/2013 dated 30.09.2016 for the assessment year 2007-08. By referring to the petition, the ld. DR submitted that while placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in assessee's own case reported in [2014] 360 ITR 257, the Tribunal held that there is no infirmity in the order 2 MP No. 308/Chny/17 of the ld. CIT(A), whereas, the Hon'ble High Court decided the issue in favour of the Revenue, thereby, there is mistake apparent on record warranting recalling the order of the Tribunal dated 30.09.2016. It was the submissions of the ld. DR that even though the Tribunal order was pronounced on 30.09.2016, the same was received in the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial) only on 08.12.2016. Hence, the time limit for filing of further appeal to Hon'ble HC was on 06.04.2017. While the file was processed for such appeal, it was decided to file a Miscellaneous Petition before the ITAT instead of filing of further appeal under section 260A of the Act before the Hon'ble High Court. Since at the time of taking a decision on filing of further appeal before the Hon'ble High Court for which the time was there till 06.04.2017, it was decided to prefer a Miscellaneous Petition before the ITAT, which was filed on 18.04.2017 and thereby the delay of 18 days had occurred. Accordingly, the ld. DR pleaded that the delay may be condoned and the MP filed by the Department be admitted and adjudicated.
2. Per contra, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that as per the present practice followed by the Tribunal, the appeal order pronounced in the open court and the time limit for filing of Miscellaneous Petition shall be reckoned from the end of the month in which the order 3 MP No. 308/Chny/17 was passed, is six months for seeking recall i.e., parties are entitled to seek rectification of the said order within six months under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as amended w.e.f. 01.06.2016. Even though the said provision empowers the Tribunal to suo moto rectify its mistake or enable the parties to the order to seek rectification within the period of limitation i.e., "Six months in which the order was passed". In the instant case, the order was passed/pronounced on 30.09.2016 and from the end of the month, the period of six month period expires on 31.03.2017. The Department filed the present Miscellaneous Petition on 18.04.2017 recalling the order of the Tribunal dated 30.09.2016.
3. However, the ld. DR has submitted that even though the Tribunal has relied on correct judgement of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in assessee's own case, but, by reproducing the held- portion printed in the ITR at page 265, the conclusion was mistakenly drawn in favour of the assessee, which is a rectifiable mistake.
4. We have heard rival contentions. The time limit for filing of Miscellaneous Petition stands ended by 31.03.2017. Since the Revenue filed the present petition on 18.04.2017, which is clearly beyond the time limit allowed under the amended provisions of section 254(2) of the Act, we are of the considered opinion that the petition filed by the Revenue 4 MP No. 308/Chny/17 before the Tribunal is not maintainable in view of the statute. Accordingly, the petition filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
5. In the result, the M.P. filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced on the 31st December, 2018 in Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 31.12.2018 Vm/-
आदे श की ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant, 2. थ / Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु (अपील)/CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयु /CIT, 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR & 6. गाड फाईल/GF.