1996 (3) TMI 156

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n earlier decision of the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 981 (All.)/1977-78, which was not cited by the department and the counsel for the assessee was not afforded with an opportunity of replying to it. 4. It is also stated that the issue before the Tribunal was not the cash credit or deposits under section 68 of the Act. The department had come up in appeal against the protective assessment and the Income-tax Officer had not made any substantive assessment so far. The Tribunal had not recorded any finding on this issue. 5. It is on the above grounds that recall of the order of the Tribunal has been sought. 6. At the time of hearing before us, the learned counsel for the assessee made only one oral submission. He vehemently argued with consider....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... application was rejected by the Tribunal by order dated 14-12-1992, by stating that it was seen from the file that the learned counsel for the assessee was present and was also heard. Even the Tribunal Order pointed out that the assessee was heard. 10. Undaunted by the above rejection, the assessee filed a further application in M.A. No. 27(All.)/1993, the contents of which are similar to the contents of the present application. This Misc. Application was rejected by an order of the Tribunal dated 12-7-1993. 11. Still undaunted by two earlier rejections, the assessee is now before us for the third time with an application, the contents of which are similar to the second application. It is quite clear that the assessee now wants a rectifi....