ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-KATNI, KATNI vs. SHRI SHANKARLAL VISHWKARMA, KATNI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 96/JAB/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 February 2023AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal has issued a corrigendum to its earlier order to correct minor typographical and grammatical errors. These corrections do not alter the substance of the original decision or affect the rights of the assessee or the revenue.

What were the facts?

This judgment is a corrigendum order to a previous ITAT order concerning appeals and cross-objections for assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15. The corrigendum rectifies several omissions and errors in the original order without causing prejudice to either party.

What were the issues?

The primary issue is the correction of errors in a previously passed ITAT order. The corrigendum addresses specific textual inaccuracies to ensure the order accurately reflects the Tribunal's intent.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No. 252/JAB/2016
C.O.No. 01/JAB/2017

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

CORRIGENDUM Per Bench Order under section 254(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) in the captioned Appeals & Cos. was passed on 27/01/2023. 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 a correction of those errors, does not therefore per se cause any prejudice to either side. The details are as under:-

1. 1. Para 2.1 (pg.2) a) The word ‘the’ be read instead of the word ‘to’ after the word ‘background’ in the first sentence of the para. b) The words ‘was the case for’ be read instead of the words ‘were’ before the words ‘the returns for AYs. 2007-08 and 2008-09…..’ in the last sentence of the para, and the word ‘were’ occurring in the sentence be omitted.

2. Para 2.2. (pg.4) : The word ‘assessment’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘It may be noted’, be read as ‘assessments’ 3. Para 2.4 (pg.5) : The word ‘had’ be read instead of the word ‘has’ before the words ‘decline from Rs. 21.11 crores’.

4. Para 3.3 (pg.9) : The word ‘be’ be read after the words ‘this may not’ in the second sentence of the para, beginning with the words ‘We are conscious….’ 5. Para 3.4 (pg.14): The word ‘a’ be read between the words ‘to’ and ‘plot’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘Sure, the assessee has before’ 6. Para 5.2 (pg.19): The word ‘thing’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘Further, two…’ be read as ‘things’.

7. Para 6 (pg.27): The words ‘We may before we conclude this part of the order’ occurring in sub-para 2 of para 6, be omitted. 2 | P a g e ITA Nos. 96 &129/JAB/2018 (A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15) (A.Y. 2012-13) C.O.Nos.10 & 11/JAB/2018 & 01/JAB/2017 Shankarlal Vishwakarma 8. Para 7 (pg.27-28): The word ‘an’ be read between the words ‘over’ and ‘period’ in the sentence beginning with the words “Further, even as observed during……..’ 9. Para 11.1 (pg.30): a) The words ‘by us' occurring after the word ‘correctness’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘Apart from the………’, be omitted. b) Notation ‘i.e.,’ be inserted after the word ‘business’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘That the assessee is ….’ and ending with the word ‘irrelevant’ (pg. 30-31). c) The word ‘making’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘The foregoing explains both……..’ and ending with the word ‘entire process’ (at pgs. 35-36), be read as ‘made’.

10.

Para 19 (pg. 67): In the following sentence, at sub-para 4 of the para (at pg. 67), the words ‘this’ and ‘finding’ be read as ‘his’ and ‘findings’: ‘None of this finding has been met or rebutted at any stage, including before us.’ 11. Para 20 (pg. 68) The words: ‘(refer para 19)’ be read in the sentence beginning with the words ‘We do not, …..’, after the words ‘in the facts of the case’, and the word ‘the’ be read before the word ‘assessee’. And the following sentence be read thereafter: ‘Science has yet not invented any instrument to measure reliability of evidence (CIT v. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) (also see: CIT v. Rimjhim Ispat Ltd. [2016] 382 ITR 152 (All).

12.

Para 25 (pg. 71) The following sentence be read at the end of the para at pg. 71: ‘Rather, the said expenditure, not booked, even as the assessee stands compensated in its respect, disproves the expense claimed.’

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →