PRAVEEN TYAGI,GHAZIABAD V. ITO, WARD-2(1), GHAZIABAD

MA 318/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Praveen Tyagi, the appellant, who sought rectification of a clerical error in a Tribunal order concerning his appeals for the assessment year 2015-16. The Tribunal had previously issued a common order for two appeals: a quantum appeal and a penalty appeal, both of which were decided on the same day. The appellant's representative pointed out that while the penalty was deleted in the body of the order, the summary erroneously stated that the penalty appeal was dismissed. The Tribunal agreed that this was a clerical mistake and rectified the error by stating that the penalty appeal is allowed.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 828797 (ITAT-NEW DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Delhi
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARPREET KAUR HANSA
• Assessee Lawyers: JAIND KUMAR JAISWAL
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘F-FRIDAY’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO. 318/Del/2025 IN ITA NO. 2832/Del/2019 Assessment Year:2015-16 Praveen Tyagi, G-230, Sanjay Nagar, Sector- 33, Ghaziabad -201002, UP (PAN: APUPT5107Q) Vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), GHAZIABAD (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by :Shri Jaind Kumar Jaiswal, Adv. Revenue by :Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansa, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 16.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 16.01.2026 ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: By way of this Misc. Application assessee’s A.R. seeks rectification of mistake apparent from record under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the Tribunal’s common order dated 27.03.2025 passed in Assessee’sappeals in ITA Nos. 2832/Del/2019 (AY 2015-16) [Quantum Appeal] and 8563/Del/2019 (AY 2015-16)[Penalty appeal] by stating as under:- “The applicant respectfully submits as under:- Printed from counselvise.com 2 | P a g e 1. The Hon’ble Tribunal was pleased to dispose of the captioned appeals (ITA Nos. 2832/Del/2019 and 8563/Del/2019) by common order dated 27.3.2025. 2. In para 25 of the said order, the Hon’ble Tribunal has categorically recorded that since the quantum addition sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) stood deleted, the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) also stood deleted. 3. However, in para 26 (the result portion), while summing up, the Hon’ble Tribunal has inadvertently mentioned that “the penalty appeal being ITA No. 8563/Del/2019 is dismissed. 4. This is clear clerical /typographical mistake apparent from record because once the penalty has been deleted (para 25), the logical and consequential result should have been that the penalty appeal is allowed and not dismissed. 5. It is humbly submitted that this is a fit case for rectification under section 254(2)of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the error is apparent from record. Prayer The applicant therefore prays that the Hon’ble Tribunal may kindly rectify the mistake in para 26 of the order dated 27.3.2025 by substituting the words “the penalty appeal … is dismissed” “with the penalty appeal …is allowed.” 2. Ld. DR did not have any serious objection to aforesaid request of the Assessee’s A.R. 3. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we are of the view that it is a fit case for rectification of mistake in the order dated Printed from counselvise.com 3 | P a g e 27.03.2025. Accordingly, we rectify the mistake apparent from record by amending Para No. 26 of the Tribunal’s order dated 27.3.2025 as under:- “26. To sum up : quantum appeal filed by the assessee being ITA No. 2832/Del/2019 is partly allowed and the penalty appeal being ITA No. 8563/Del/2019 is allowed.” 4.The rest of the contents of the aforesaid Tribunal’s common order dated 27.03.2025 will remain unchanged. 5. In the result, the Misc. Application filed by the assessee stands allowed in the above terms. Order pronounced on 16.01.2026. SD/- SD/- (SUDHIR KUMAR) ( (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Date: 16-01-2026 SR Bhatnaggar Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com 4 | P a g e Printed from counselvise.com "