Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 1250 - ITAT HYDERABADRectification of mistake - period of limitation - Unexplained investment - assessee seeks recall of the order on the ground that the Tribunal erred in holding that the assessee did not furnish any evidence with regard unexplained investment, overlooking the fact that written submissions were filed with contained detailed explanation - Held that:- Section 254(2) of the Act refers to the period of limitation reckoning from the end of the month in which the order is “passed” and not from the ‘date of receipt of the order’. As rightly pointed out by the Ld. DR, the expressions “passed” “initiated” and “served/received” are not interchangeable and the legislature in its wisdom expressly used the phraseology depending on the intention. In the instant case, the expression “passed” cannot be stretched to mean that the period of limitation should be reckoned from the date of receipt of the order. The assessee has not followed due diligence. It was also referred that even the date of order is not placed on record. In such an event we are afraied that we have no authority to interpret the expression “passed” as being akin to the ‘receipt of the order’. Since, the MA is filed beyond the period of limitation even reckoned from the date of uploading in website, we have no other alternative except to dismiss the application as being barred by limitation. - Decided against assessee.
|