AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 290
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad has vide appellate order dated 28.07.2016 has disposed of the assessee's appeal in ITA No. 117/Alld./2011 for ay:2007-08. The assessee has now filed this MA seeking to correct mistake apparent from records which as per assessee has crept in the appellate order dated 28.07.2016 passed by the tribunal. 2. The assessee is a Public Sector Enterprise being Government of India undertaking . It is the say of the learned counsel for the assessee that Tribunal vide appellate order dated 28.07.2016 in ITA No. 117/Alld/2011,, has committed a mistake apparent from record, while adjudicating Grounds No. 4, 5 and 6, wherein the tribunal has given relie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., which is coming out from the appellate order passed by Tribunal. 4. The second mistake apparent from record in the appellate order passed by tribunal pointed out by learned counsel for the assessee is with respect to the addition made by the AO to the tune of Rs. 16.4 lacs, which was further enhanced by ld. CIT(A) by Rs. 48.33 lacs , leading to total addition to the income to the tune of Rs. 64.73 lacs being confirmed by learned CIT(A), u/s. 145A of the Act . It is the say of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the tribunal has given part relief only to the tune of Rs. 48.33 lacs as to the enhancement made by learned CIT(A), while additions made earlier by the AO to the tune of 16.4 lacs were not adjudicated by the tribunal on the gr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... who instructed to rectify the grounds of appeal to reflect correct amount of relief and it is Mr. Sanjay B Gupta Manager(Finance) of the assessee who made the corrections. It is also stated that Mr. Sanjay B. Gupta , Manager( Finance) was duly authorized to make corrections by the management of the assessee. 5. The ld. DR relied upon the appellate order passed by tribunal and submitted that there are no mistakes apparent from record which can be rectified at this stage within limited scope of Section 254(2) of the 1961 Act. 6. We have considered rival contentions and have perused the material available on record. We have observed that the assessee is a Public Sector Enterprise being a Government of India Undertaking. We have observed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot increased the WDV of the assets on which the depreciation has been claimed by the assessee in accordance with the I.T. Act. The said fact is apparent from the revised computation of statement, the copy of which was also filed before us at page No.39 of the paper book. Since the assessee has not changed the WDV for the purpose of computation of depreciation as was being brought forward from the earlier year therefore, in our opinion the Assessing Officer was not correct in law in disallowing the depreciation amounting to the sum of Rs. 43.95 lacs. We accordingly delete the said addition and allow ground no.4 taken by the assessee." The tribunal in para 7 had given finding that excess depreciation amounting to Rs. 292.92 lacs was writte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of enhancement of income by learned CIT(A) , which may require detailed arguments. The tribunal has dismissed the said ground of appeal raised by assessee on the grounds as being not pressed. The assessee is prejudiced by said dismissal in limine. Since Tribunal has restricted its finding to 43.95 lacs, it will be in the interest of justice that the Grounds No.5 and 6 which were not adjudicated completely by tribunal are restored back to the file of Tribunal for fresh adjudication and to this extent the MA filed by the assessee on this issue is partly allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above.We order accordingly. 7. The second issue raised by the assessee in MA is with respect to the restricting of the relief by tribunal u/....