What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal is rectifying minor clerical errors in its previous order to ensure accuracy. The corrections involve adding specific phrases and placing other words in parentheses to clarify the original intent of the judgment.

This is a corrigendum order to a previously passed judgment. The corrigendum rectifies minor omissions in paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4 of the original order. These corrections are procedural and do not alter the substance of the judgment.

What were the issues?

The primary issue is the correction of clerical errors in a previously issued ITAT order. The corrections aim to ensure the clarity and accuracy of the judgment.

Shri Pankaj Goel, Itarsi vs ACIT | s.254(1) | ITAT Jabalpur 2022

Order under section 254(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟) in the captioned appeal was passed on 29/09/2022. It is, however, found that there have occurred certain omissions in the said order, which are, therefore, hereby sought to be rectified through this corrigendum order. The same being only correction of those errors, do not therefore per se cause any prejudice to either party. The details are as under:

Para 2.3 (pages 4-6 of the order) The following words be read in the fourth sentence of the said para, beginning with the words „That the house property is…..‟ (at page 4 of the order), after the words „in which case the rent from building‟: “would be assessable as „income from house property‟,” and the last words of the sentence „business income‟ be placed under parenthesis.

Para 2.4 (pages 6-7 of the order) 1 | P a g e

(AY: 2013-14) Pankaj Goel v. Asst. CIT In the sentence beginning with the words „In the facts of the case, …‟, at page 6 of the order , the word „of‟ be read between the words „one‟ and „whose objects‟.

SHRI PANKAJ GOEL,ITARSI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE ITARSI, ITARSI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments