2017 (7) TMI 778

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....7.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Misc. Applications No. 82 to 87 of 2015 filed by the respondent no. 1. The tax appeals are also filed by the department challenging common order dated 25.11.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowing the appeals filed by the assessee. 2. Brief facts are as under: 2.1 The respondent is an Institute of Housing and Estate Developers. The question of taxing the income earned by the respondent no. 1 from the contribution of its members reached the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Case of the assessee was that on the principle of mutuality, the same was not taxable at the hands of the assessee. For the assessment years 2006-07 to 2011-12, the Tribunal passed a common order on 29....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....order of rejection of assessee's appeals proceeded to hear the appeals afresh and by further order dated 25.11.2016 allowed the assessee's appeals. The Tribunal held that the principle of mutuality would apply and the income of the assessee would not be taxable. This common order of the Tribunal was challenged by the department in the present Tax Appeals No. 327 of 2017 to 332 of 2017. While these tax appeals were pending, the revenue filed the present writ petitions in which, as noted, the department has challenged the order of the Tribunal dated 29.07.2016 granting of the Misc. Applications for rectifications. 3. Having heard learned advocates for the parties and having perused the documents on record, we cannot countenance the approach ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng and elaborate consideration of the very same issues and very same facts to come to a contrary conclusion. It is not necessary nor possible for us to hold whether the Tribunal's first view was correct or the subsequent one. It is enough to hold that the Tribunal could not have undertaken such incisive and detailed examination of facts and law to come to the conclusion which are completely contrary to its own conclusion arrived at after detailed considerations. Such powers simply do not flow from the power of rectification under sub-section (2) of Section 254 of the Act. 5. Under the circumstances, in our opinion the Tribunal committed a serious error in allowing the assessee's rectification applications and recalling its earlier order of....