2021 (7) TMI 252

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....R Respondents by : Nupur Shah , AR ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV , VICE PRESIDENT : Present miscellaneous application is directed at the instance of the Revenue pointing out an apparent error in the order of the Tribunal dated 6.12.2016 in ITA No.1520/Ahd/2013. Revenue seeks to recall of the impugned order. 2. Misc. Application is running into one-and-half pages, which reads as under: ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....made observation that claim of the first party i.e. Jay Corporation about the possession and seizure of land is factually incorrect. A person can be in possession of a land and can be having development right without there being ownership. Thus facts have not been appreciated in right perspective by the Ld. Revenue authorities." The above findings of the ITAT contradicts the fact accepted....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was executed. This finding is contradictory to the fact narrated in the confirmation letter dated 2.12.2010 written by Shri Naresh M. Shah, proprietor of Jay Construction. Copy of this letter is available on page no.129 of paper book filed at the time of hearing. Thus, according to the Revenue, an error has crept in the order of the Tribunal about this fact, and therefore, this error is required ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....idavit of Shri Naresh Muktilal Shah dated 23.12.2010 and copy of agreement dated 27.6.2007 entered into between the assessee and Jay Construction. On overall appreciation of all the documents in their setting as a whole, the Tribunal has recorded a finding that Jay Corporation was having development rights. As far as the letter referred by the Revenue dated 2.12.2010 is concerned, in this letter, ....