CA Saurabh Chokhra
Brief of the case:
- The ITAT Bangalore in the above cited case held that application under the provisions of sec.254(2) seeking rectification of order passed by tribunal is maintainable only in cases where it was established that specific attention of the bench was drawn to a particular decision and the decision was specifically relied upon but not considered by the Tribunal.
- When the case was not even brought to tribunal’s attention during the course of hearing then later on filling application for rectification arguing tribunal’s ignorance of that case is clear abuse of process of law and such application is liable to be set aside solely on such fact.
Facts of the case:
- The assessee filed miscellaneous appeals u/s 35(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 stating that certain mistakes apparent from record had crept into the Tribunal order dated 12/02/2016. As per the petitioner a mistake apparent from record had crept into the said order of the Tribunal as this Tribunal had omitted to adjudicate the additional ground relating transfer of land to developer by way of joint development agreement.
- Further, it was urged that the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dr.T.K.Dayalu (202 Taxman 531), though quoted during the course of arguments and relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners-companies, hadnot been referred to and thus according to the petitioner-, this constitutes a mistake apparent from record as the binding decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court had not been followed by this Tribunal while passing the impugned order.
- Therefore, petitioner prayed tribunal to recall its order and reconsider the case.
Held by ITAT Bangalore:
Paid content
Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.
