SRI LAKSHMI JEWELLERS P LTD, COIMBATORE V. ITO CORPORATE WARD-3, COIMBATORE

MA 30/CHNY/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 103 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9600 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 04-11-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी दुगाŊ राव Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद˟ के समƗ Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member M.P. No. 30/Chny/2021 आयकर अपील सं./ [In I.T.A. No.2687/Chny/2019] & C.O. No. 101/Chny/2019 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Sri Lakshmi Krishna Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., 405, O Sathya Complex, Big Bazar Street, Coimbatore 641 001. [PAN:AAHCS2338B] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 3, Coimbatore. (Petitioner by) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Petitioner by : None ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 14.10.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: By means of present Miscellaneous Petition, the assessee seeks to rectify the mistake apparent in the order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 2687/Chny/2019 and in C.O. No. 101/Chny/2019 dated 29.09.2021 relevant to the assessment year 2011-12. In the petition, it was pointed out that in first para of the order, it was mentioned that “......... order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai....”, whereas, it should be “........ order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- M.P. No. 30/Chny/21 2 1, Coimbatore. Further, in page 4, para 6 of the order, it was mentioned that “Since we have remitted the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication....” , whereas, it should “Since we have remitted the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication....” since in para 5 of the order, the Tribunal has remitted the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer and requested for suitable rectification. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. 3. We have heard the ld. DR and gone through the order passed by the Tribunal and find the above mistakes apparent in the order and the same are rectified as under without any other modification in the said order: 4. The first paragraph should be read as under: “This appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross Objection filed by the assessee are directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Coimbatore in I.T.A. No. 80/2018-19 dated 15.07.2019 relevant to the Assessment Year 2011-12”. 5. Similarly, para 6 should be read as under: “6. So far as the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is M.P. No. 30/Chny/21 3 concerned, the C.O. was filed in support of the appellate order passed by the ld. CIT(A). Since we have remitted the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, the C.O. filed by the assessee became infructuous and liable to be dismissed.” Accordingly, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed.” 6. Accordingly, the order of the Tribunal dated 29.09.2021 stands rectified. 7. In the result, the MP filed by the petitioner is allowed. Order pronounced on 28 th October, 2022 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (G. MANJUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 28.10.2022 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.