Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (5) TMI 885 - AT - Income TaxRecall of order Rectification of mistake apparent on record u/s 254(2) of the Act Various disallowances made Held that:- The assessee had claimed payment of remuneration including incentive to Mr. Ajay Sukhwani under the head "Incentive to directors" assessee contended that only a sum of Rs.3,60,000/- was paid to Mr. Ajay Sukhwani on account of consultation charges and the Tribunal has committed an error while observing that a sum of Rs.7,20,000 was paid - even if the plea of the assessee is to be admitted that no consultation charges were paid to Mr. Ajay Sukhwani, then the deduction claimed by the assessee in this respect will be required to be deleted and accordingly the incentive claim as allowed to the other two directors of the company at the rate of Rs.3,60,000/- is to be allowed to Mr. Ajay Sukhwani - The net tax effect of any such disallowance/deduction will be nil in that event also - The assessee even did not point out the double benefit claimed and allowed to the assessee during the argument on merits in the main appeal before the Tribunal - when definite factual observations were made by the Tribunal that an amount of Rs.7,20,000/- had already been paid to Mr. Ajay Sukhwani and no further incentive was justified then the assessee has come up with the stand that the earlier deduction was wrongly claimed by the assessee. The assessee through this application has attempted to dissect the order of the Tribunal into pieces then to vent out his dissatisfaction regarding the finding arrived at by the Tribunal on the factual matrix of the case in the garb of application u/s 254(2) alleging mistakes apparent on the record - The mistakes pointed out by the assessee do not fall in any manner even in the definition of mistakes, what to say of any mistake apparent on the record - If the assessee had not been satisfied with the order of the Tribunal, the proper course for him was to file an appeal before the higher Appellate Authority - even the scope of provisions of section 254(2) is very limited and the Tribunal has got no authority to recall or review its entire order passed on merits of the case Decided against Assessee.
|