TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing any necessity to reargue the matter or to reappraise the facts as appearing from the record can only be rectified. Likewise, the possibility of forming of a different opinion then the one expressed in the order passed u/s 254(1) cannot be treated as ground for entertaining the application u/s 254(2) of the Act. We find that under the facts and circumstances available on record, possibly, the order was passed by the Tribunal after considering the arguments from both sides. Once the possible view has been taken, on the basis of material available on record, it cannot be said there is apparent mistake in the order which can be rectified u/s 254(2). See ANAMIKA BUILDERS PVT. LTD. [ 2001 (5) TMI 39 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] and POPULAR ENGINEERING CO. [ 2001 (1) TMI 76 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] Totality of facts clearly indicates that there is no mistake apparent from record in the order of the Tribunal. Even otherwise, the order was passed by the Tribunal after considering the arguments advanced from both sides with high sense of responsibility and as mentioned earlier through these applications, the assessee is merely trying to get the orders reviewed/recalled, which i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... page-21) (iii) information provided to the assessee was vouched and corroborated (page-12-13 of MA) (page- 20 of paper book of the assessee) (iv) Ambrunova Trust was established on 21/02/1997 and status of account is active (page-13 of miscellaneous application) B. Non-adjudication/Non-consideration of claim/ argument / submission of the assessee that:- (i) Documents supplied by the assessee do not show that any amount was deposited during the relevant assessment year and no addition can be made in relevant assessment year (page-14 of Misc. Application) (ii) Trust is discretionary trust, there is no taxable event in the impugned assessment year (page-15 of Misc. Application) (iii) Trust is a non resident trust, trustees are non residents and income is received outside India, hence no addition can be made (page-16 of Misc. Application) (iv) Entire addition has been made merely on the basis of presumption and assumption (page-17 of Misc. Application). C. All case laws cited and relied by assessee were not considered and discussed by the Tribunal in its order (page-17 of Misc. Application). 2.2. We have perused the contention raised by the assessee and also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opted to challenge the legal proceedings initiated validly under the Income tax Act, 1961. Thus, there is no mistake apparent from record, requiring any rectification, thus, the applications on this account deserves to be rejected. (b). The next issue raised in these applications relates to accounts in the names of the appellants and their arguments are that (i) documents supplied do not show any amount having been deposited during the relevant assessment year. (ii) Trust is discretionary trust : there is no taxable event. (iii) Trust being a non-resident trust, trustees being non-residents and income being receivable outside India, no addition can be made, and (iv) Entire addition has been made merely on the basis of presumption and assumption. And Thus no addition is called for in the period relevant for assessment year under consideration. We find that this argument of the assessee has already been considered and addressed with while deciding the appeals and such a plea cannot be said to result in a mistake apparent from record. It is incomprehensible as to how and what basis the appellant are claiming the trust a discretionary trust, when no trust deed was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the application is that the Bench held that the documents provided to the assessee were vouched and corroborated with the evidence on the basis of US Senate report and tax exchange treaty, such a contention is untenable as US Senate report has not been extracted by the Bench alone but the same has already been referred and discussed by the Assessing Officer in his order, though in brief. He has based his findings partly on the basis of said report. Even otherwise, if the assessee was having any grievance nothing prevented him to take this ground before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and also before this Tribunal before hearing of these appeals. The appellants cannot be permitted to take the advantage of acts of their own omissions and commissions. It is worth mentioning here that so far as reliance by the ld. DR upon the US senate Permanent Sub Committee report is concerned, no objection was raised by the assessee at the time of hearing. No application was ever filed by the assessee against admission of such evidence and even did not ask the bench to provide opportunity to controvert the report or even objected not to admit the same. On receipt of the order from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
