Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur
Dcit, Jaipur vs M/S Bhuramal Rajmal Surana(Mfrs.), ... on 21 February, 2017
vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR
Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k
BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM
vk;dj vihy [email protected] No. 143/JP/2016
(Arising out of ITA Nos. 409 & 499/JP/201 and
407 & 626/JP/2012)
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 08-09.
The Dy. Commissioner of Income- cuke M/s. Bhuramal Rajmal Surana
tax, Cirle-2, Vs. (Mfrs.), Lal Katla, Johari Bazar,
Jaipur. Jaipur.
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AABFB 0612 L
vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent
jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri R.A. Verma (Addl. CIT)
fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Anil Kaushik (CA)
lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 17.02.2017.
?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2017.
vkns'k@ ORDER
PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM.
This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the revenue seeking rectification of the Tribunal's order dated 09.10.2015 in ITA No. 409 & 499/JP/201 and 407 & 626/JP/2012).
2. The ld. D/R submitted that there is a apparent mistake in the order Tribunal in mentioning that " We find merit in the proposal of both the parties. Accordingly, we are inclined to set aside the issue raised in the cross appeal for the assessment year 2007-08 and restore the matters to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh after the judgment of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, in the case of Anuj Kumar Varshney & Others vs. ITO (supra) is delivered, after giving adequate opportunity of 2 MA No. 143/jp/2016 Bhuramal Rajmal Surana (Mfrs.) being heard to the parties." The ld. D/R submitted that the department has not given any agreement/consent with regard to restore the matter to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh after the judgment of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Anuj Kumar Varshney is delivered. He, therefore, requested to rectify the mistake apparent on record.
3. On the contrary, the ld. Counsel for the assessee supported the order of the Tribunal.
4. We have heard rival contentions and perused the material available on record. After considering the submissions of the both the parties, in the interest of natural justice, we hereby recall our order dated 09.10.2015 in the above captioned appeals and direct the Registry to fix the appeal for hearing on 10/03/2017.
5. In the result, Miscellaneous Application is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21/02/2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
¼foØe flag ;kno½ ( dqy Hkkjr)
(VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) ( KUL BHARAT )
ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member
Jaipur
Dated:- 21/02/2017
d/
vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzfs "kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. The Appellant- The DCIT, Circle-2, Jaipur
2. The Respondent- M/s. Bhuramal Rajmal Surana (Mfrs.),Jaipur.
3. The CIT,
4. The CIT (A)
5. The DR, ITAT, Jaipur
6. Guard File (MA No. 143/JP/2016) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@ Assistant. Registrar 3 MA No. 143/jp/2016 Bhuramal Rajmal Surana (Mfrs.)