M/s Subex Limited, Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer Ward-6(1)(4), Bangalore

MA 109/BANG/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 103 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8985 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-11-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-11-2022
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.P. No. 109/Bang/2022 (in IT(TP)A No. 107/Bang/2019) Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/s. Subex Ltd., RMZ Ecoworld, Outer Ring Road, Devarabisanahalli, Bangalore – 560 103. PAN: AABCS9255R Vs. The Income tax Officer, Ward – 6 (1)(4), Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ajay Rotti, CA Revenue by : Shri Pavan Kumar, Addl. CIT DR Date of Hearing : 04-11-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 04-11-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present miscellaneous petition is filed by assessee seeking certain typographic mistakes in the order passed by this Tribunal dated 14/07/2022. 2. The Ld.AR submitted that typographic mistakes have crept in paras 5 and 9 at page 8 and page 12 respectively. 3. We have verified the records and found that there are typographic mistakes that deserves to be corrected. Henceforth paras 5 and 9 shall be read as under: Page 2 of 3 M.P. No. 109/Bang/2022 (in IT(TP)A No. 107/Bang/2019) “5. ....................It is submitted that, also in respect of unrealised foreign exchange loss on FCCBS, whether to be treated as income or not, was also concluded in favour of assessee in assessee’s own case in ITA No. 689/Bang/2014 which forms part of the order passed by this Tribunal for A.Y. 2010-11.................................under the transfer pricing provisions.” “9. We direct the Ld.AO to verify the claim of assessee that the loss has not been claimed in the computation of income and forms part of computing the margin as per transfer pricing provisions. The Ld.TPO is directed to consider the claim in accordance with the above view in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2010-11 (supra).” 4. As has been mentioned in the miscellaneous petition, no other portion of the order has been sought for any rectification and the result remains to be the same. In the result, the M.P. filed by the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 04 th November, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, the 04 th November, 2022. /MS / Page 3 of 3 M.P. No. 109/Bang/2022 (in IT(TP)A No. 107/Bang/2019) Copy to: 1. Appellant 4. CIT(A) 2. Respondent 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 3. CIT 6. Guard file By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore