ITAT Chandigarh dismisses Revenue's applications alleging mistakes in previous order for assessment years

The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh dismissed the Revenue's Miscellaneous Applications alleging a mistake apparent on record in a previous order related to assessment years 1996-07, 1998-99 & 1999-2000. The Tribunal affirmed that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court had been considered and reiterated its lack of jurisdiction to review its order. Consequently, the Tribunal found no mistake apparent on record and dismissed the Revenue's applications on 07.08.2019.

---

---

Issues:
1. Mistake apparent on record in the common order dated 31.10.2017 of the Tribunal.
2. Consideration of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'CIT Vs. Gujarat Flluro Chemicals' (2014) 1 SCC 126 (SC).
3. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal to review its order.

The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh considered the present Miscellaneous Applications moved by the Revenue, alleging a mistake apparent on record in the common order dated 31.10.2017 related to assessment years 1996-07, 1998-99 & 1999-2000. Despite the absence of the assessee, the applications were disposed of after hearing the Ld. DR as they were moved by the Department. The Tribunal reviewed the order and noted that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'CIT Vs. Gujarat Flluro Chemicals' (2014) 1 SCC 126 (SC) was duly considered in the previous order. The Tribunal clarified that it has no jurisdiction to review its order as per settled law. Consequently, the Tribunal found no mistake apparent on record in the order dated 31.10.2017 and dismissed the applications of the Revenue. The Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue were accordingly dismissed, and the order was pronounced in the Open Court on 07.08.2019.

In summary, the judgment primarily dealt with the plea of the Revenue regarding a mistake apparent on record in a previous order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal reviewed the order and confirmed that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court had been duly considered. Additionally, the Tribunal clarified its jurisdiction, stating that it cannot review its order as per established legal principles. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's applications, finding no merit in them.

---