Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Mukund Lal Jaisansaria Versus D.C.I.T., Circle- Jhunjhunu, Jhunjhunu

2018 (1) TMI 513 - ITAT JAIPUR

Maintainability of application u/s 254 - application filed after the expiry of limitation - Held that:- The Bench is of the view that the order was passed on 24/8/2016 and the Misc. application has been filed on 02/6/2017. As per the amendment in Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 w.e.f. 01/6/2016, the limitation for filing the M.A. is only six months. Thus, this M.A. is beyond the time limit provided in the Act. Hence, the miscellaneous application filed after the expiry of limitation is n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

filed appeal vide ITA No. 720/JP/2014 for the assessment year 2010-11 against the order of learned CIT(A)- III, Jaipur dated 24/09/2014. This Coordinate Bench of the ITAT, Jaipur has decided the appeal in absence of the assessee by applying decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd. (1991) 38 ITD 320 and dismissed the assessee s appeal. 3. The assessee filed this Misc. application and explained the reasons as to why the hearing of appeal on 24/08/2016 could n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s the ex parte order. (iii) That the rejection of appeal by applying ratio laid down in 38 ITD 320 & 223 ITR 480 is a mistake apparent on the face of record in light of following decisions. a) That in the recent decision the Hon ble Guahati High Court in the case of Rajendra Prashad Borah v/s ITAT [2008] reported in 302 ITR 243, has held that rule 24 of income tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rule, 1963, as it stands per se does not empower the Tribunal to dismiss an appeal for default in the absenc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in the case of Multiplan India (P) Ltd reported in 38ITD 320 Therefore the appellant prays that ex parte order passed may kindly be recalled and the appeal be decided on merits after hearing the appellant. 4. After hearing both the sides, the Bench is of the view that the order was passed on 24/8/2016 and the Misc. application has been filed on 02/6/2017. As per the amendment in Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 w.e.f. 01/6/2016, the limitation for filing the M.A. is only six months. Thus .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as been recorded by the Tribunal in para- 4 read as under:- Now the revenue is in appeal before us. The ld. DR has vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer and argued that the statement recorded u/s 132(4) has evidentiary value under the Income Tax Act. This group has surrendered additional income on account of inflated expenses, therefore, this year also, the assessee should honour the disclosure made by the Director of the company during the course of search. Number of incrimina .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lief. On careful perusal of the above order of the Hon ble jurisdiction High Court, it is noted that the Hon ble High Court has observed that the appeal is not the proper remedy and the same is not maintainable and appropriate remedy for the appellant is to approach the Tribunal for appropriate relief. Thus, the Hon ble High Court has neither the directed the Revenue to file the miscellaneous application nor has expressed any view on the limitation for filing the miscellaneous application. The H .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he month in which the order is passed. The amendment has been brought into the statute by Finance Act, 2016 w.e.f. 01.06.2016. Since, the impugned order was passed on 15.06.2016, therefore, the period of limitation would reckon from the end of June, 2016 and would expire on 31.12.2016. Undisputedly the miscellaneous application of the Revenue was filed on 31.03.2017 which is beyond the period of limitation expired on 31.12.2016. The limitation for rectification is provided in the Income Tax Act .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

us application filed after the expired of limitation is not maintainable. For ready reference, we quote section 254(2) as under:- (2) The Appellate Tribunal may, at any time within 72[six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed], with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record73, amend any order passed by it under sub-section (1), and 73shall make such amendment73 if the mistake is brought to its notice by the assessee or the 74[Assessing] Officer : Provided .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f fifty rupees.] 76[(2A) In every appeal, the Appellate Tribunal, where it is possible, may hear and decide such appeal within a period of four years from the end of the financial year in which such appeal is filed under sub-section (1) 77[or sub-section (2)] 78[***] of section 253 : 79[Provided that the Appellate Tribunal may, after considering the merits of the application made by the assessee, pass an order of stay in any proceedings relating to an appeal filed under sub-section (1) of sectio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version