2000 PTD 2162

M.A. (RECT) 160/KB OF 1999-2000 (REF: I.T.O. NO. 1502/KB OF 1998) Versus M.A. (RECT) 160/KB OF 1999-2000 (REF: I.T.O. NO. 1502/KB OF 1998)

Citation2000 PTD 2162

CourtIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal

ORDER

S. M. SIBTAIN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER).-- -The applicant, through the instant application seeks rectification/recall of the order recorded by the Tribunal on 18-6-1999 in ITA No. 1502/KB of 1998-89 (Assessment year 1996-97). and the learned representatives of the two parties.

3. The first error said to be committed by the Tribunal in the order ibid is that while the A.A.C. Sukkur Range recorded in his order that, "to elaborate his viewpoint, the assessee also filed written arguments in this context that read as under he did not reproduced the written submissions therefore. The Tribunal, therefore, erred in recording, "we find on the facts and circumstances supra":

4. We have perused the order ibid and we find that the appellant has quoted the Tribunal out of context. If the learned A.A.C. has omitted to record any fact the error may have been committed by him but not by the Tribunal.

5. The next error said to be committed by the Tribunal is in observing that the learned DCIT, however, has dismissed the explanation on the ground that respondent has shown purchases of Rs.14,000,000 in the trading A/c whereas purchases in trading A/c were actually shown at Rs.12,400,000.

6. We find that admittedly the figure recorded in the impugned orders is Rs.14,000,000 and the assessee has made no attempt to get it rectified in the assessment order not it was brought to the notice or the Bench at the time of hearing.

7. The next error said to be committed by the Tribunal is that the Tribunal incorrectly concluded that the information about the discount of Rs.299.470 is received by the learned DCIT after the original assessment and it is definite information. According to the applicant, the discount supra was disclosed by him in the statement of trading A/c as gross profit of Rs.300,000.

8. We find on perusal of the Court register that no such plea was taken at the time of hearing.

9. According we find that the applicant has failed to point out any error in the order ' the Tribunal which is apparent from record, hence application dismiss

C. M. A. /M. A. K./22 Tax(Trib.) Application dismissed.