Apex Metchem (P) Ltd. v. ITAT & Ors.
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Appeal (Tribunal) - Order of Tribunal -Mistake apparent from record
In pursuant of search under section 132 conducted upon M, name of assessee-company was found having debit and credit statements in bank account. Assessment proceedings were initiated against M under section 158BC at Mumbai and against assessee-company under section 158BD at Jaipur. Assessee appeared as an intervener in proceedings initiated against M under section 158BC and it also preferred appeals against assessment order made under section 158BC and CIT (A) order before, Mumbai bench transferred to Jaipur Bench. Thereafter, on assessee application, President of Tribunal, Mumbai Bench passed an order directing said appeal to be heard and determined by Mumbai Bench. In meanwhile, CIT (A), Jaipur, decided assessment under section 158BD. Revenue and assessee, under section 254(1) preferred appeal against CIT (A) order. Thereupon, Jaipur Tribunal bench recalled its order on ground that there was mistake apparent from record as order of Tribunal; Mumbai had not been brought to its notice. Held: It was mistake apparent from record as assessee case was transferred from Mumbai Bench to Jaipur bench, therefore, there was no order available on record of consolidating appeal of M and assessee for being heard at Mumbai Bench, hence, it could not be said to mistake apparent from record being committed by Tribunal, Jaipur Bench in hearing such appeals and deciding it under section 254(1).
Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 254
A.Y. Block period 1-4-1988 to 23-3-1999
Decision: In favour of assessee.
Case Law Analysis:CIT v. K.L. Bhatia [1990] 182 ITR 361/ 51 Taxman 436 (Delhi) [Para 25]; Asstt. CIT v.Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. [2008] 173 Taxman 322 (SC) [Para 26]; and Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 295 ITR 466/ 165 Taxman 307 (SC) [Para 27].