ACIT 31(2), MUMBAI V. LAKE BLOOM RESIDENCY, MUMBAI

MA 50/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6649 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 02-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: S M MAKHIJA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'SMC' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO. 50/MUM/2017 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 199/MUM/2015) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) A C I T - 31(2) C-13, 1ST FLOOR R. NO. 107 INCOME TAX OFFICE, BKC BANDRA (W), MUMBAI 400052 VS. M/S. LAKE BLOOM RESIDENCY 109, ABBA RESIDENCY PATEL ESTATE ROAD JOGESHWARI (W) MUMBAI 400012 PAN AABFF1884E APPLICANT RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR YADAV RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.M. MAKHIJA DATE OF HEARING: 09.02.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 03.05.2018 O R D E R PER R.C. SHARMA, AM THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY RE VENUE WITH REGARD TO THE APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L DATED 22.06.2016 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 199/MUM/2015. 2. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE TH ROUGH THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION. I FIND THAT THE ABOVE APPEA L OF REVENUE WAS DISPOSED OFF BY THE ITAT MUMBAI SMC BENCH VIDE OR DER DATED 22.06.2016 AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. THER E WAS TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE ITAT IN PARA 6 WHERE IT I S MENTIONED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSE THOUGH THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE I RECTIFY THE APPARENT MISTAK E IN PARA 6 SO AS TO READ THAT APPEAL OF REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSE. THERE IS ALSO A TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKE IN PARA 5 IN SO FAR AS IN PLACE OF CIT(A) IT HAS BEEN TYPED AS AO. TWO MIDDLE LINES OF THE ORDER REA D AS UNDER: - MA NO. 50/MUM/2017 M/S. LAKE BLOOM RESIDENCY 2 THEREFORE, I AM OF THE OPINION, FOR WANT OF SPEAKI NG ORDER THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE. I RECTIFY THE APPARENT MISTAKE AND DIRECT THAT AO SHOULD BE READ AS CIT(A). 4. THE NEXT SENTENCE SHOULD BE READ AS THE CIT(A) SH ALL ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING A REASONABLE OPPOR TUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JU STICE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY REVENUE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 RD MAY, 2018. SD/ - (R.C. SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 3 RD MAY, 2018 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) -34, MUMBAI 4. THE CIT - 24, MUMBAI 5. THE DR, SMC BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.