9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1694X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he present Miscellaneous Application and further reiterated by his ld. counsel at the time of hearing before the Tribunal, there are allegedly the following mistakes in the order of the Tribunal dated September 27, 2017 (supra) :- "2.1. That the ld. Bench did not appreciate that alteration in any returned figure cannot be done u/s. 143(1). The scope is very limited and/or restricted and any deviation beyond the purview of this Section. Serial no. 37 in the intimation being tax on total income has been changed by the CPC from '0' to Rs.3,53,931/- which is not permissible and violates "Any Returned Figure" as used in the Section. 2.2. That the ld. Bench did not consider Section 154(1)(a) -"with a view to rectify any mistake ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ia through NRE A/c only and the status was NRI. Any denial will be gross injustice. We rely upon the CBDT Circular No 13/2017 New Delhi dated 11.04.2017 (read with circular no. 14 (XL-35) dated 11 April 1995) as also the Calcutta High Court latest decision in Utanka Roy v.s. DCIT-International Taxation - Transfer Pricing Kolkata in W.P. No. 369 of 2014 and order Dated 15 December 2016. The Tribunal being the final fact finding authority, is expected to look into the matter afresh". 3. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, submitted that there are no mistakes in the order of the Tribunal dated September 27, 2017 (supra) as alleged by the assessee in the present Miscellaneous Application. He contended that the Assessing Officer was fully empowere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... computing the tax payable on the income returned and adjustment for the same, therefore, was made by the Assessing Officer as per clause (b) of section 143(1). As rightly contended by the ld. D.R., all these aspects were duly taken into consideration by the Tribunal while dismissing the appeal of the assessee vide its order dated September 27, 2017 and there is no mistake much less a mistake apparent from record in the said order of the Tribunal. What the assessee is seeking by way of present Miscellaneous Application is nothing but a review of the decision taken by the Tribunal vide its order dated September 27, 2017, which is not permissible under section 254(2). We, therefore, find no merit in the Miscellaneous Application filed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
