ARUDRA ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), HYDERABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal has corrected specific monetary figures in its earlier order due to typographical errors. The rest of the original order's content remains unchanged.
What were the facts?
This is a corrigendum to a previous ITAT Hyderabad order for the assessment year 2011-12. The corrigendum corrects typographical errors in the amounts specified in paragraphs 6, 8, and 11 of the original order.
What were the issues?
Correction of typographical errors in monetary amounts within an ITAT order.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Date of hearing: 13/03/2023 Date of pronouncement: 13/03/2023 CORRIGENDUM In the aforesaid order dated 7th Feb. 2023, following typographical errors have crept at Paras 6, 8 and 11 of the order of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the order is modified and the corrected figures as per Paras 6, 8 and 11 in the above order is to be read correctly as given below: Para No. of order Amount Specified in Corrected Amount the order (Rs.) (Rs.) Para 6 830,959,540 830,99,540 Para 8 37,46,569 33,46,569 Para 11 65,33,568 165,33,568 2. The rest of the contents of the order shall remain unchanged.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
