ACIT, CHENNAI V. Vive Sudhakar, CHENNAI

MA 13/CHNY/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4656 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-04-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 15-04-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B SMC’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी दुगाŊ राव Ɋाियक सद˟ के समƗ Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member M.P. Nos. 13, 14, 15 and 16/Chny/2021 [In I.T.A. Nos.241, 242, 243 & 244/Chny/2020] Assessment Years: 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2005-06 & 206-07 The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), New No. 46, B-4, Ground Floor, Investigation Wing, Chennai-34. Vs. Shri Vive Sudhakar [Formerly Known as VN Sudhagaran], No. 4, 9 th Cross Street, Kapaleeshar Nagar, Neelankarai, Chennai 600 041. [PAN:AMDPS2184A] (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 22.04.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: By means of present four Miscellaneous Petitions, the Revenue seeks to rectify the common order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. Nos. 241, 242, 243, 244/Chny/2018 relevant to the assessment years 1998- 99, 1999-2000, 2005-06 and 2006-07 dated 10.11.2020. The ld. DR relied on para 11and 12 of the order of the Tribunal and submitted that in para 11, the issue of the appeals has been remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue de novo in accordance M.A. Nos. 13 to 16/Chny/21 2 with law, whereas, while giving common direction for other appeals in para 12, the Tribunal has remitted the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and also directed the assessee to file all the details without fail when the date is given for hearing by the Assessing Officer. Hence, the ld. DR has pleaded that the apparent mistake in the common order of the Tribunal may be rectified. 2. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has fairly conceded to rectify the mistake apparent on record. 3. Both the sides have been heard, perused the petitions as well as common order passed by the Tribunal dated 10.11.2020 and find that in para 11, the issue of the appeals has been remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue de novo in accordance with law, whereas, in para 12, the Tribunal has remitted the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and also directed the assessee to file all the details without fail when the date is given for hearing by the Assessing Officer. Thus, there is a typographical error crept in the order requires rectification. Accordingly, para 12 of the order of the Tribunal is rectified, which reads as under: M.A. Nos. 13 to 16/Chny/21 3 “12. As the facts in all these appeals are similar and the additions made by the Assessing Officer are also similar, therefore, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 in all these appeals are set aside and remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue in all the appeals de novo in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to file all the details without fail when the date is given for hearing by the Assessing Officer. Thus, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.” 4. In the result, all the miscellaneous petitions filed by the Revenue are allowed. Order pronounced on 25 th April, 2022 at Chennai. Sd/- (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 25.04.2022 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 6. गाडŊ फाईल/GF.