ITO, Malerkotla V. Ishita Gupta, Dhuri

MA 1/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9922 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 1/CHD/2013 (IN ITA NO. 580/CHD/2012) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 THE ITO-IV(3), VS MS ISHITA GUPTA, MALERKOTLA PROP M/S GARG CATTLE FEED INDS, DHURI PAN NO. AQVPS 7598P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.K. SAINI RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 8.3.2013 PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.3.2013 ORDER PER MEHAR SINGH, AM THIS MISC. APPLICATION PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE ARI SES OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 26.7.2012 PASSED IN ITA NO. 5 80/CHD/2012 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2 2. THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE REFERRED TO IN THE SAID M. A. IS THAT THERE IS TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DA TED 26.7.2012, AS POINTED OUT, IN PARA 1.3 OF THE MISC. APPLICATION, WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREIN UNDER:- 1.3 THERE APPEARS TO BE TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR IN THE ORDER IN AS MUCH AS IN 1 ST PART OF THE OPERATIVE PORTION OF THE ORDER, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IT IS A FIT CAS E TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT WHEREAS IN THE 2 ND PART THE ISSUE HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF ASSESSIN G OFFICER. 3. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE CONTENTS OF THE MI SC. APPLICATION AND CONSIDERED THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE REVENUE AND FOUND THAT A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR CREPT IN THE SAID ORDER WHICH I S APPARENT FROM RECORD AND NEEDS RECTIFICATION WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTI ON 254(2) OF THE ACT. CONSEQUENTLY, THE PARA 4 OF THE SAID ORDER DATED 26 .7.2012 BE READ AS UNDER:- 4. HAVING REGARD TO THE FACT-SITUATION OF THE PRES ENT CASE, AND THE FACTUM OF NON-PROVIDING OF PROPER, EFFECTIVE AN D REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY BY THE CIT(A), TO THE ASSESS EE, IT IS A FIT CASE TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF CIT(A), FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE SEA. ACCORDINGLY, THE CASE IS RESTORED TO T HE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 3(1) FURTHER, IN FIRST SENTENCE OF PARA 3, OF TH E SAID APPELLATE ORDER THE WORD DR SHOULD BE READ AS AR 3 THE OTHER PART OF THE ORDER SHALL REMAIN THE SAME . 4. IN THE ABOVE TERMS, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 11 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2013. SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (MEHAR SINGH) JUDICAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 11 TH MARCH, 2013 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR