2019 (4) TMI 827 - AT - Income Tax

Rectifiable mistake u/s 254(2) - HELD THAT - The assessee raised the issue with regard to the addition in ground No. 2 to 5 of the assessee s appeal which was discussed in detail and decided against the assessee. The Tribunal in its order dated 25.04.2018 discussed the issue in detail creditor-wise confirmed the order of the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee as well as the revenue. The issue raised by the AR with regard to the relief was not out of the CIT(A) s order and there was no such ground raised by the assessee for relief. There is no mistake in the order of the ITAT which require modification hence the assessee s M.A. on this issue is rejected. The alternate submission with regard to the addition to be made in the hands of the individual partners was not argued during the hearing of M.A. However it is found that the Tribunal has considered entire arguments and material placed before us and confirmed the addition in the hands of the firm hence it is considered that no separate adjudication is necessary on this issue. From the ITAT s order it is found that there was no mistake in the order of the ITAT and if at all any mistake is crept i.e. in the orders of the lower authorities and the assessee may approach the lower authorities for appropriate action if time limit permits. Since there is no mistake in the order of the Tribunal which require modification / rectification in the order of this Tribunal the M.A. filed by the assessee is dismissed. Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rectification of mistake in the order of the Tribunal regarding addition of Rs. 64,64,437.
2. Consideration of relief of Rs. 14,50,877 in addition to the relief granted by Ld.CIT(A).
3. Alternate argument for making the addition in the hands of individual partners instead of the firm.

Analysis:
Issue 1:
The assessee filed a Miscellaneous Application (M.A.) against the Tribunal's order regarding the addition of Rs. 64,64,437. The Tribunal had discussed and decided against the assessee on this issue in detail, confirming the Ld.CIT(A)'s order. The Ld.AR argued for rectification of a mistake in the Tribunal's order due to an alleged error in the Ld.CIT(A)'s order. However, it was concluded that there was no mistake in the Tribunal's order necessitating modification, leading to the rejection of the assessee's M.A. on this issue.

Issue 2:
The assessee claimed entitlement to additional relief of Rs. 14,50,877, apart from the relief granted by Ld.CIT(A) amounting to Rs. 28,70,000. The Ld.AR argued that the mistake in the Ld.CIT(A)'s order should be rectified as it was merged with the Tribunal's order. However, it was determined that the issue raised by the Ld.AR was not based on the Ld.CIT(A)'s order, and as there was no ground raised for the relief of Rs. 14,50,877, the Tribunal rejected the assessee's M.A. on this issue.

Issue 3:
Regarding the alternate submission for making the addition in the hands of individual partners instead of the firm, it was noted that this argument was not raised during the M.A. hearing. The Tribunal had already considered all arguments and material, confirming the addition in the hands of the firm. Therefore, no separate adjudication was deemed necessary on this issue.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found no mistakes in its order and suggested that any errors should be addressed by approaching the lower authorities if permissible within the time limit. Consequently, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee was dismissed, upholding the original decision.