AI Insights
The case involves a miscellaneous application filed by the revenue seeking rectification of a mistake apparent from the record in an earlier Tribunal order. The mistake pertained to the incorrect restoration of the matter to the 'Assessing Officer' instead of the 'Ld CIT(A)', as intended. The Tribunal acknowledged the error as a typographical mistake and corrected it, restoring the matter to the Ld CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.
Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136562 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
4 month(s) 1 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date
13-07-2023
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
SMC
Next Hearing Date
13-07-2023
Assessment Year
2011-2012
Appeal Filed On
12-03-2023
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “SMC” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) M.A. No. 233/Mum/2023 in I.T.A. No. 7628/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2011-12) ITO-16(1)(1) Room No. 436A Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Harman H. Baweja C-65, Aashirvad 2 nd Cross Lane Lokhandwala Andheri West Mumbai-400 053. PAN : AFZPB8018B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha Date of Hearing 14.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement 14.07.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The revenue has filed miscellaneous application seeking rectification of a mistake apparent from record in the order dated 9 th June, 2022 passed in ITA No.7628/Mum/2019. 2. The Ld D.R submitted that the assessee had filed the appeal against the ex-parte order passed by Ld CIT(A) and hence the Tribunal chose to remit the matter to the file of Ld CIT(A), which is made clear in the first part of paragraph 5 of the order passed by the Tribunal. However, in the concluding portion of paragraph 5, the Tribunal has inadvertently restored the matter to the file of the “Assessing Officer”. Accordingly, the ld D.R submitted that it has resulted in a mistake apparent from record and accordingly prayed for correction of the above said mistake. Harman H. Baweja 2 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, since the prayer of the revenue, in effect, relate to rectification of typographical error, we proceed to rectify the mistake apparent from record that was pointed out by the revenue. 4. Accordingly, the last sentence in paragraph 5 of the order dated 9 th June, 2022 is substituted by the following sentence:- “With these directions the matter stands restored to the file of the Ld CIT(A) for adjudication de novo.” 5. In the result, the miscellaneous application filed by the revenue is allowed. Pronounced in the open court on 14.7.2023. Sd/- (B.R. BASKARAN) Accountant Member Mumbai.; Dated : 14/07/2023 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai. 6. Guard File. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) PS ITAT, Mumbai
Mehul