M/s. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD., MUMBAI V. DCIT CIR. 7(1), MUMBAI

MA 43/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5465 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH D, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NOS. 43 & 50/MUM/2018 (OUT OF ITA NOS. 6226/MUM/2004 & 5981/MUM/2004 : A.Y : 2000 - 01 M/S. NOVARTIS INDIA LIMITED SANDOZ HOUSE, DR. ANNIE BESANT ROAD, MUMBAI. PAN : AAACH2914F (APPLICANT) VS. DCIT, CIRCLE - 7(1), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI NITESH JOSHI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SENTHIL KUMAR DATE OF HEARING : 27/09/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/09/2019 ORDER GIVING EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF THIRD MEMBER U/S 254(1) WE NOTED THAT THE THIRD MEMBER HAS DECIDED THE FIRST QUESTION REFERRED TO HIM VIDE PARA 13 OF HIS ORDER AS UNDER : - 13. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE OBVIOUS CONCLUSION IN THIS MATTER IS THAT THERE DID EXIST A MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD QUA THIS ISSUE IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 07.07.2017. HENCE, QUESTION NO. 1 IS DECIDED IN TERMS OF THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE THIRD MEMBER CONCURRING WITH THE JUDICIAL MEMBER. TH EREFORE, THE MAJORITY VIEW IS CONFIRMED. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE ON THIS ISSUE IS ALLOWED. 2 MA NOS. 43 & 50/MUM/2018 M/S. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD. 2. AS REGARDS THE SECOND QUESTION REFERRED TO THE THIRD MEMBER, THE THIRD MEMBER HAS AGAIN CONCURRED WITH THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE JUDICIAL MEMBE R AND HAS HELD IN PARA 17 OF HIS ORDER AS UNDER : - 17. IT CANNOT BE OVERLY STRESSED THAT WHEN AN ORIGINAL ORDER HAS BEEN AMENDED BY A SUBSEQUENT ORDER, THE ORIGINAL ORDER BECOMES INOPERATIVE AND IT IS THIS SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT WHICH HOLDS FIELDS. THE OR IGINAL ORDER STANDS ECLIPSED, NAY, OVERRULED BY THE SUBSEQUENT AMENDED ORDER. IN SUCH A SCENARIO, NOT FOLLOWING THE AMENDED ORDER, PARTICULARLY WHEN SUCH AMENDED ORDER HAS BEEN DULY BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE ADJUDICATING AUTHORITY/COURT DURING THE RELE VANT PROCEEDINGS, DEFINITELY CONSTITUTES A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. THE FACTUM OF THE AMENDED ORDER HAVING BEEN BROUGHT ON THE RECORD BEFORE THE ADJUDICATING AUTHORITY RENDERS THE RECORD OF THAT AUTHORITY TO INCLUDE THE AMENDED ORDER. THE AMENDED OR DER THUS BECOMES A PART OF THE RECORD OF THE ADJUDICATING AUTHORITY AND NOT FOLLOWING THAT AMENDED ORDER IS NONE OTHER THAN A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. SINCE THE THIRD MEMBER CONCURRED WITH THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE JUDICIAL MEMBER, THE MAJORITY VIEW IS CONFIRMED. ON THIS ISSUE ALSO, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019. SD/ - SD/ - (M. BALAGANESH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (MAHAVIR SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE : 27 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019 *SSL* 3 MA NOS. 43 & 50/MUM/2018 M/S. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD. COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, D BENCH, MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T, MUMBAI