DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1) (2), MUMBAI V. FORBES GOKAK LIMITED, MUMBAI

MA 813/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6774 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 27-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M C OMI NIGSHEN
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRISMT MS KADAMBARI PARIDA
• Keywords: Rectification of order

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 813/MUM./2017 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 3789/MUM./2019 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 05 0 6 ) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)(2), MUMBAI . APP LICANT V/S M/S. FORBES & COMPANY LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS FORBES GOKAK LTD.) FORBES BUILDING, CH A RANJIT RAI MARG FORT, MUMBAI 400 001 PAN AAACF1765A . RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : SHRI M.C. OMIN IGSHEN ASSESSEE BY : SHRI/SMT./MS. KADAMBARI PARIDA DATE OF HEARING 01 . 0 6 .2018 DATE OF ORDER 01.06.2018 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. B Y THIS APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT ) REVENUE SEEKS RECTIFICATION OF ORDER DATED 28 TH FEBRUARY 2017, PASSED IN ITA NO.3789/MUM./2009. 2 . T HE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT WHILE DECIDING GROUND NO.4 IN REVENUES APPEAL, THOUGH, THE TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND RESTORE D THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER , BUT , HAS ULTIMATELY DISMISSED 2 M/S. FORBES & COMPANY LTD. THE GROUND. IN THIS CONTEXT, HE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PARA 57 OF THE APPEAL ORDER. 3 . T HE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE AGREED WITH THE AFORE SAID SUBMISSIONS OF THE REVENUE. 4 . WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. ON A PERUSAL OF PARA GRAPH 53 TO 57 OF THE APPEAL ORDER REFERRED TO ABOVE, IT IS NOTICED THAT , THOUGH , THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOWING ITS EARLIER ORDER PASSED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE HAS SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ALLOWING ASSESSEES CLAIM AND HAS RESTORED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER, HOWEVER, IN PARA 57 OF THE ORDER IT HAS BEEN INADVERTENTLY MENTIONED THAT GROUND NO.4, RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THE AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL BEING A MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD IS RECTIFIED UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT BY SUBSTITUTING THE LAST SENTENCE OF PARA 57 OF THE APPEAL ORDER WITH THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE: GROUND NO.4 OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. 5 . IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATION IS ALLOWED TO THE EXTENT INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01.06.2018 SD/ - RAJESH KUMAR ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - SAKTIJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED : 01.06.2018 3 M/S. FORBES & COMPANY LTD. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : ( 1 ) THE ASSESSEE; ( 2 ) THE REVENUE; ( 3 ) THE CIT(A); ( 4 ) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; ( 5 ) THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; ( 6 ) GUARD FILE . TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ( SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ) ITAT, MUMBAI