BEST REALTRECH INDIA P.LTD,NEW DELHI V. ITO, WARD-4(3), NEW DELHI

MA 172/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Best Realtech (India) Pvt. Ltd., which filed a Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking rectification of clerical errors in the Tribunal's previous order. The errors included incorrect details regarding the reassessment proceedings and the dates mentioned in the order. The Tribunal acknowledged these mistakes and corrected them, ensuring the clarity and correctness of the final determination of the appeal, which was decided in favor of the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708373 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Foramer France
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRAM SINGH SHARMA
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings; Rectification of order
• Section: 148; 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A-FRIDAY’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO. 172/Del/2025 IN IN ITA NO. 390/DEL/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 BEST REALTECH (INDIA) PVT. LTD., H-8, FIRST FLOOR, BEST PLAZA, NETAJI SUBHASH PLACE, PITAMPRUA, DELHI – 34 (PAN: AADCB1848D) Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(3), NEW DELHI (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 18.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 18.07.2025 ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP : By way of this Misc. Application assessee seeks rectification in the Tribunal’s order dated 27.12.2024 passed in Assessee’s ITA No. 390/Del/2020 relating to assessment year 2011-2012 by submitting the following contentions:- 2 | P a g e i) “This misc. application is being filed by the Assessee under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking rectification of certain inadvertent mistakes apparent from the record in the order dated 27.12.2024 passed in the above captioned appeal by the Hon’ble Bench (copy of the order dated 27.12.2024 is enclosed as Annexure 1). ii) While upon perusal of the order in its entirety, it is evident that the appeal has been decided in favour of the assessee. However, in paragraph 7 of the order dated 27.12.2024, the Hon’ble bench has reproduced the reasons recorded for initiating the reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act in the case of the assessee. It is submitted that due to an inadvertent clerical error, the reasons recorded reproduced in the order do not pertain to the facts of the present case. The correct reasons recorded for initiating the reassessment proceedings are enclosed at page no. 57-58 of the paper book, which was duly filed before the Hon’ble bench during the hearing. (Copy of the correct reasons recorded is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure 2). iii) Further, in paragraph 7.1 of the order, the Tribunal, due to an inadvertent error, has incorrectly upheld the findings of the CIT(A), NFAC which was decided against the assessee, stating : “In view of 3 | P a g e the above, we find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A)-NFAC and hence, we confirm the order of the CIT(A)-NFAC quashing the reassessment.” However, in the same paragraph, the Hon’ble Tribunal also observed that the issue was squarely coverd in favour of the assessee. This inconsistency results in an apparent mistake on record. It is pertinent to mention that, upon reviewing the entire order in its entirety, it is evident that the appeal has been decided in favour of the assessee. There is no ambiguity qua the order of the Hon’ble ITAT except these clerical mistakes which have crept in. iv) It is respectfully submitted that there is also an inadvertent error in paragraphs 1 and 7 of the impugned order, wherein the date of the assessment order passed under section 153C/143(3) of the Act has been incorrectly mentioned as 28.02.2024 and 25.03.2019, respectively. The correct date of the said assessment order is 28.02.2014. A copy of the assessment order dated 28.02.2014, passed under section 153C /143(3) of the Act, is enclosed at page 47- 48 of the paper book. v) It is respectfully submitted that the above mentioned inconsistencies in the order constitute apparent mistakes on record, which warrant rectification under the provisions of Section 254(2) of the Act. 4 | P a g e vi) The applicant, therefore, humbly prays that the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to rectify the apparent mistakes and pass appropriate orders, ensuring clarity and correctness in the final determination of the appeal.” 2. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite issue of notice for hearing, hence, we are deciding the instant misc. application exparte qua the assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the relevant records. 3. Ld. DR did not controvert the aforesaid contention of the assessee made in its misc. application 4. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we are of the opinion that it is a fit case for rectification of mistake in the Tribunal’s order dated 27.12.2024. Accordingly, we rectify the mistakes apparent from record in the following manner :- (i) The relevant and correct reasons recorded under para no. 7 may now be read as under:- 5 | P a g e 6 | P a g e (ii) Para 7.1 of the Tribunal’s order dated 27.12.2024 may now be read as under:- 7 | P a g e “7.1 In the absence of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all materials facts and assessment framed u/s. 143(3) of the Act and reopening is beyond 4 years, the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Foramer France (Supra). In view of the above, we quash the reassessment order dated 28.02.2014 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 153C of the Act. (iii) The wrong date of assessment order mentioned in paragraphs no. 1 and 7 of the Tribunal’s order dated 27.12.2024 is hereby corrected and may be read as “28.02.2014”. 5. The rest of the contents of the aforesaid Tribunal’s order dated 27.12.2024 will remain unchanged. 6. In the result, the Misc. Application filed by the assessee stands allowed in the aforesaid manner. Order pronounced on 18.07.2025, upon conclusion of hearing. Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi 8 | P a g e "