M/s Meera Devi Avadh Bihari Singh Memorial Trust, Lucknow V. Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow

MA 14/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2170 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-06-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 06-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K RAM

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO.14 /LKW/20 14 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A.NO.102/LKW/2010) ASSESSMENT YEAR: N.A. M/S MEERA DEVI AVADH BIHARI SINGH MEMORIAL TRUST, 4/36, VISHAL KHAND, GOMTI NAGAR, LUCKNOW. PAN:AABTM7801J VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RANGE - 1, LUCKNOW. (A PPLICANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SHRI R. K. RAM, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 27/06/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 7 /07/2014 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. IN THIS MISC. APPLICATION, IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT IN THIS CASE, THE RESPONDENT WAS CIT, RANGE - 1, LUCKNOW BUT BY MISTAKE, THE NAME OF THE RESPONDENT HAS BEEN MENTIONED AS INCOME TAX OFFICER, RANGE - 1, LUCKNOW. IT IS SUBMITTED IN THE MISC. APPLICATION THAT THIS IS APPARENT MISTAKE AND THE SAME SHOULD BE RECTIFIED. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND HENCE, WE DECIDE THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. 3. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. [ 2 ] 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE. WE FIND THAT AS PER FORM NO. 36 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE RESPONDENT IS CIT, RANGE - 1, LUCKNOW BUT IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 30/03/2010 , THE NAM E OF THE RESPONDENT IS MENTIONED AS INCOME TAX OFFICER, RANGE - 1, LUCKNOW. THIS IS APPARENT MISTAKE AND HENCE , WE RECTIFY THE SAME. WE HOLD THAT THE NAME OF THE RESPONDENT IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 30/03/2010 SHOULD BE READ AS CIT, RANGE - 1 LUCKNOW. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 1 7 /07/2014. *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE O RDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A ) 5. DR, ITAT, LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR