"Page | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA 483/Del/2023 (ITA No.1129/Del/2020 (Assessment Year: 2005-06) M/s Aptive Components India Private Limited (Formerly known as M/s Delphi Automotive System Private Limited), P-24, Green Park Extension, New Delhi Vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAACD0226E Assessee by : Shri Gagan Kumar, Adv Shri Gagan Deep, Adv Revenue by: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27/06/2025 Date of pronouncement 31/07/2025 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. By virtue of this miscellaneous application, the assesses seeks to recall the order passed by this tribunal in ITA No. 1129/Del/2020 for Assessment Year 2005-06 dated 20.10.2023. 2. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessee had challenged the disallowance of deduction of ₹94,14,147/- on account of advance written off vide ground No. 3 before us in main appeal. The assessee had challenged in ground No. 4 that the ld CIT(A) erred in not giving Printed from counselvise.com MA 483/Del/2023 M/s Aptive Components India Private Limited Page | 2 consequential benefit of deduction of ₹2,94,25,184/- claimed u/s 10A of the Act. While these are the grounds raised by the assessee, this tribunal dismissed the ground No. 3 raised by the assessee vide its finding given in para 10 of the order. Thereafter, in para 11, it was mentioned by this tribunal that “No arguments were advanced by the ld AR before us at the time of hearing with regard to Ground No. 4. Hence, the same is here by dismissed as not pressed.” In our considered opinion, this observation in para 11 is wrong as the assessee clearly stated in Ground No. 4 that it is only in consequence to other disallowance made by the ld AO. In view of the decision in ground No.3, the Ground No. 4 requires to be specifically adjudicated. But the Tribunal had wrongly decided that it was not pressed. In view of this factually incorrect statement made by the tribunal, it requires recalling of the order as it is a mistake apparent from record within the ambit of section 254(2) of the Act. Hence, we recall the order passed by this tribunal for the limited purpose of adjudication of Ground No. 4 raised by the assessee in the original ground. Registry is directed to fix the main appeal for hearing on 30.09.2025, only for the limited purpose of adjudication of Ground No. 4 raised in the original appeal. Both the parties are informed in the court and no fresh notice of hearing would follow. 3. In the result, miscellaneous application of the assessee is allowed in the above mentioned terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 31/07/2025. -Sd/- -Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (M. BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 31/07/2025 A K Keot Printed from counselvise.com MA 483/Del/2023 M/s Aptive Components India Private Limited Page | 3 Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "