Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (5) TMI 815 - AT - Income TaxRectification petition u/s 254(2) - certain vital submissions advanced on behalf of the Revenue were ignored / not considered by the ITAT - HELD THAT:-The said allegation has no basis since all the relevant findings given by the A.O. for present case, findings given by the Ld. CIT(A), the argument advanced by the Ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue and his reliance placed on various judgments, the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee alongwith various case laws relied upon by him and the rejoinder of the Ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue have been discussed in detail in the impugned order dt. 07/02/2020 and that after considering all the aforesaid facts as well as the argument alongwith various judicial pronouncement, a just decision has been taken by the ITAT. The contention of the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee that the facts of the assessees cases were different from case of Shri Brij Bhushan Singal and Ors had already been considered and thereafter it has been held that the facts of the present case were similar to the fact of the case of Shri Brij Bhushan Singal and Ors, therefore this contention of the Ld. Special Counsel for the Assessee that the ITAT omitted to take note of the submission advanced on behalf of the revenue in the impugned order was factually incorrect. In this Misc. Application the Revenue wrongly alleged that the non cognizance of the live nexus existing between the incriminating material found during the search action at various places / premises and non adjudication of the question as to what constitutes the incriminating material, the said allegation is factually incorrect. The another contention of the Department is that there was omission to take into consideration the reliance placed by the Revenue on the various decision and return a finding with regard to vital submission of the Revenue is concerned, we have already pointed out that all the submissions and the case laws relied by the Ld. Special Counsel for the revenue find place of the impugned order and after considering those submissions as well as case laws, the conclusion has been drawn by the ITAT. As already pointed out that there is no mistake apparent from the record therefore, we are of the view that the Misc. Application moved by the Department is not maintainable. In the present case, it appears that the Department wants to get the order passed by the Tribunal reviewed which is not permissible as the ITAT has no power to review its order and the right platform / forum for redressal of this grievance on any special question of law arising from the order of the ITAT would be the Hon'ble High Court under section 260A. In the present case the ITAT passed the order in consonance with judicial principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid referred to case of Shukla & Brothers and all the four preposition of judgment stands fulfilled in the impugned order [2020 (2) TMI 786 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] for the A.Y. 2008-09 viz there is adequate clarity on thought, decision has been well reasoned,the reason for decision have been well communicated and the order is well reasoned. In the present case since all the arguments alongwith the various judicial pronouncements relied upon by both the parties, were duly considered, there exists no manifest error in the decision of the ITAT. Therefore, in view of the totality of the fact as discussed herein above, we do not see any merit in this Misc. Application moved by the Department.
|