What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal issued a corrigendum to its earlier order to accurately reflect the presence of the appellant's counsel in the cause title. This correction is considered an integral part of the original order.

This document is a corrigendum to a previous ITAT order dated 09/06/2023. The corrigendum corrects the cause title to include the names of the advocates who argued the case for the appellant. All other contents of the original order remain unchanged.

What were the issues?

The primary issue addressed is the correction of a factual error in the cause title of a previously issued ITAT order concerning the representation of the appellant.

Late Mr. Arun Kumar R. Mehta (L/H… vs DCIT | ITAT Mumbai 2023

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No.2743/Mum/2011

I.T.A. No.7309/Mum/2011

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

The aforesaid appeals have already been disposed of vide order dated 09/06/2023 by this Tribunal wherein Sr. Advocate Shri Rohan Shah, who had argued the matter at length on last various occasions, however, presence was not mentioned. This aspect has been rightly brought to our attention by the assessee. Hence, we are issuing this corrigendum accordingly. In the cause title in page one of the Tribunal order dated 09/06/2023 it should be read as under:-

अपीलाथी की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Rohan Shah & Shri. P.P. Bhandari प्रत्यथी की ओरसे/Respondent by : Ms. Surabhi Sharma (CIT-DR) & Shri. Manoj Kumar Sinha (Sr. DR)

सुनवाई की तारीख/ 21.04.2023 : Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/ 09.06.2023 : Date of Pronouncement All the other contents in the said Tribunal order shall stand unamended. This Corrigendum may be read as part and parcel of the said Tribunal order.

LATE MR. ARUN KUMAR R. MEHTA (L/H MR. RUSSELL ARUNKUMAR MEHTA (SON),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 1, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Latest GST High Court judgments