M/S ROHILKHAND EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. PR. CIT(CENTRAL), BAREILLY

ITA 737/LKW/2019Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 October 2021AY 2009-101 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal clarified that the respondent in the appeal is 'Pr. CIT (Central) Lucknow' and not 'CIT (Exemptions)'. This correction does not alter the substance of the original order.

What were the facts?

This is a corrigendum to a previous ITAT order. The original order mistakenly typed 'CIT (Exemptions)' instead of 'Pr. CIT (Central) Lucknow'. The corrigendum corrects this typographical error.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was a clerical error in identifying the respondent in the appeal. The corrigendum addresses this factual inaccuracy in the order.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

While passing the order in above Income Tax Appeal i.e. I.T.A.No.737/Lkw/2019 dated 20/10/2021, in place of “Pr. CIT (Central) Lucknow” due to oversight and inadvertently, “CIT (Exemptions)” has been typed. We, therefore, issue this Corrigendum to read “Pr. CIT (Central) Lucknow” in place of “CIT (Exemptions)”. Except this modification, the order dated 20/10/2021 will remain unchanged.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →