DCIT, Circle, Panchkula V. M/s Virgo Industries, Panchkula

MA 135/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4598 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 31-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH !, ' # $ . .. . & , '( # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & DR. B.R.R.KUMAR, AM M.A. 135/CHD/2018 IN ./ ITA NO. 1356/CHD/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 THE DCIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA. VS M/S VIRGO INDUSTRIES, # 129, SECTOR 10, PANCHKULA. ./ PAN NO: AAEFV9154A / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ! / REVENUE BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH '# ! / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANOJ KUMAR $ % #&/ DATE OF HEARING : 22.04.2019 '()* #&/ D ATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.05.2019 ')/ ORDER PER DIVA SINGH BY THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED U/S 254(2) OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 IN ITA 1356/CHD/2017, THE REVENUE PRAYS FOR RECTIFYING THE ORDER WHEREIN IN PARA 1 OF THE AFORESAID OR DER, THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IS INCORRECTLY MENTIONED. 2. SHRI MANOJ KUMAR APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE PRAYER OF THE REVENUE IS NOT BEING OPPOSED AS THERE IS REFERENCE TO INCORRECT ASSESSMENT YEAR AND THE ERROR CAN BE RE CTIFIED AS IT IS BORNE OUT FROM RECORD. APART FROM THIS ERROR, IT WAS HIS PRAYER THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN OTHER TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS IN THE SAID PARA AS R EFERENCE HAS BEEN MADE TO THE ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE DATED 29.09.2016 OF CI T(A)-2 GURGAON INSTEAD OF ORDER DATED 04.07.2017 OF CIT(A), PANCHKULA. THE LD. SR.DR REFERRING TO FORM NO. 36 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND COPIES OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) INCLUDED ON RECORD AGREED THAT THESE TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS MAY BE CORRECTED. M.A. 135/CHD/2018 IN ITA 1356/CHD/2017 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS AND SEEN THE MATERIAL A VAILABLE ON RECORD. ON A PERUSAL OF THE SAME, WE FIND THAT THE PRAYE R OF THE REVENUE BY WAY OF THE APPLICATION AND THE ORAL PRAYERS OF THE PA RTIES HAVE TO BE ALLOWED. THE MISTAKES POINTED OUT BY THE PARTIES ARE REC TIFIABLE UNDER THE SPECIFIC PROVISION INVOKED AS THESE ARE BORNE OUT FROM THE RECORD ITSELF REQUIRING NO LENGTHY ARGUMENTS OR DEBATE. ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW OF THE SAME, THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE FIRST PARA WHICH IN THE O RDER DATED 04.04.2018 READS AS UNDER : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 29.09.2016 OF CIT(A)-2 GURGAON PERTAINI NG TO 2011-12 ASSESSMENT YEAR.. WOULD HEREINAFTER IS BEING RECTIFIED AND WOULD READ AS UNDER : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 04.07.2017 OF CIT(A) PANCHKULA PERTAINI NG TO 2014-15 ASSESSMENT YEAR .. 4. ACCORDINGLY, IN TERMS OF THE ABOVE, THE MISCELLANEOUS APP LICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.05. 2019. SD/- SD/- ( . .. . & ) ( ! ) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (DIVA SINGH) '( #/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ' #/ JUDICIAL MEMBER + , (+ #,- .-# / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT - 2. / THE RESPONDENT - 3. $ /# / CIT 4. $ /# ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. -01 #2 , & 2 , 34516 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 15 7% / GUARD FILE (+ $ / BY ORDER, 8 / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR