Tribunal rejects revenue's bid to recall order, citing no retroactive application.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's Miscellaneous Application seeking the recalling of the Tribunal's order, emphasizing that the subsequent circular and special order could not be applied retroactively. The Tribunal ruled that the non-consideration of these documents did not constitute a mistake apparent from the record and therefore did not meet the criteria for rectification under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act. The decision was based on maintaining consistency with previous rulings and concluded that the subsequent circulars and orders did not apply to the original order.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Recalling of Tribunal Order
2. Application of CBDT Circulars
3. Tax Evasion through Bogus LTCG
4. Monetary Limits for Filing Appeals
5. Rectification under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Recalling of Tribunal Order:
The revenue sought the recalling of the Tribunal's order dated 20/08/2019 in ITA No. 842/JP/2019. The basis for this request was that the appeal fell under the exceptions mentioned in para 2 (tax evasion through bogus LTCG) of CBDT Circular No. 23 of 2019 dated 06/09/2019.

2. Application of CBDT Circulars:
The Tribunal had initially dismissed the appeal due to the tax effect being below the revised monetary limit as per CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019 dated 08/08/2019. The revenue argued that the case fell under the exceptions of penny stock scams as specified in CBDT Circular No. 23 of 2019 dated 06/09/2019. The Tribunal noted that the subsequent circular and the special order were not in existence at the time of the original order, and thus, could not be applied retroactively.

3. Tax Evasion through Bogus LTCG:
The revenue contended that the assessee claimed exemption under Section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act for capital gains, which was added back by the Assessing Officer as it was deemed bogus. The revenue argued that this case involved organized tax evasion through bogus LTCG, falling under the exceptions of the new circular.

4. Monetary Limits for Filing Appeals:
The Tribunal's original decision was based on the revised monetary limits for filing appeals as per Circular No. 17 of 2019, which increased the limit for appeals before the ITAT from Rs. 20,00,000 to Rs. 50,00,000. The revenue's appeal was dismissed as the tax effect was below this threshold. The Tribunal reiterated that the new circular and special order could not be applied to appeals decided before their issuance.

5. Rectification under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act:
The Tribunal examined whether the non-consideration of the subsequent circular and special order constituted a mistake apparent from the record, which could be rectified under Section 254(2). The Tribunal concluded that since these documents were not in existence at the time of the original order, their non-consideration did not constitute an apparent mistake that could be rectified.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal followed the decision of the Coordinate Bench in a similar case, concluding that the subsequent circular and special order did not apply to the impugned order dated 21/08/2019. The revenue's Miscellaneous Application was dismissed as it did not meet the criteria for rectification under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized maintaining consistency with previous decisions, ruling that the non-consideration of subsequent circulars and orders did not constitute an apparent mistake on the record.

---