" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM MA No. 67 & 68/KOL/2025 (Arising in ITA No. 747 & 748/KOL/2023 for A.Ys. 10-11 & 11-12) Tata Consumer Products Limited 1, Bishop Lefroy rod, L.R Sarani SO Kolkata-700020 West Bengal Vs JCIT (IN SITU) & DCIT, Cir-4 Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8th Floor, Kolkata-700069 West Bengal अपीलार्थी/ (Applicant) प्रत् यर्थी/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ashik Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri. S.B. Chakraborthy, DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 17.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: By virtue of this Miscellaneous Applications the assessee seeks the rectification of the order passed in ITA No. 747 and 748/KOL/2023 for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2011-12. 02. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted in Para no.6 of the order, the Hon'ble Bench has stated that the ld. CIT (A) has already followed the decision of the co-ordinate bench and restricted the Arm’s Length Price of corporate guarantee fee at 0.5% by following the decision of the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case and further mentioned that we do not find any merit in the ground no.3 raised by the Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 MA Nos. 67 & 68/KOL/2025 Tata Consumer Products Limited; 2010-11 & 2011-12 assessee and dismissed the same, whereas as a matter of fact this has wrongly been dismissed instead of allowing the appeal. Accordingly, the order may be rectified. The ld. DR on the other hands, fairly agreed to the argument of the ld. AR that this is a factual mistake committed in the said order. 03. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that while deciding the issue, the appeal of the assessee has wrongly been dismissed instead of allowing the appeal, which is a typo mistake while passing the order and accordingly, para no.6,7 & 8 of the order are substituted with the following paras: - “6. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the ld. CIT (A) has already followed the decision of the co-ordinate bench and restricted the Arm’s Length Price of corporate guarantee fee at 0.5% by following the above decision of the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case. Therefore, we find merit in ground no.3 raised by the assessee and accordingly, same is allowed. 7. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. 8. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 04. Order of the Tribunal is modified to this extent only. 05. In the result, both the Miscealleneous Application of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.09.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated:17.09.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 MA Nos. 67 & 68/KOL/2025 Tata Consumer Products Limited; 2010-11 & 2011-12 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Printed from counselvise.com "