FAURECIA AUTOMOTIVE HOLDINGS, PUNE,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(IT), CIRCLE-1, PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 44/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 May 2023AY 2020-213 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal issued a corrigendum to correct the name of the assessee's counsel from 'Shri Siddhant Chandgude' to 'Shri Siddhesh Chaugule' and the date of pronouncement from '___-04-2023' to '10-04-2023'. The original order stands with these modifications.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT, Pune, which was disposed of on April 10, 2023. Subsequently, the assessee requested a corrigendum to rectify errors in the original order.

What were the issues?

Correction of clerical errors in the names of counsel and the date of order pronouncement in a previously issued ITAT judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144C(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

The captioned appeal filed by the Appellant was heard by the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('ITAT), Pune on 10th April 2023, and the order was pronounced on 10th April 2023. The order of the Hon'ble ITAT is attached as Annexure I. In the Hon'ble ITAT’s order, the name of the counsel for the Appellant was inadvertently mentioned as Shri Siddhant Chandgude & Shri Harshad Konde. However, the Appellant would like to mention that the counsel who argued on behalf of the Appellant are as follows: Shri Siddhesh Chaugule & Shri Harshad Konde Further, the date of pronouncement of order is inadvertently mentioned as _ 04- 2023 instead of 10-04-2023 on page no. 1 of the said order. We request your good office to kindly issue a corrigendum rectifying the above mistake apparent from record.”

2.

We find that through inadvertently the name of one of the ld. Counsel for the assessee who appeared before the Bench has been mentioned as „Shri Siddhant Chandgude‟ in place of Shri Siddhesh Chaugule. Further, the date of 2 Corrigendum in Faurecia Automotive Holdings A.Y. 2020-21 pronouncement of order has been inadvertently mentioned as ___-4-2023 instead of „10-4-2023‟. We therefore, issue this corrigendum to read the name of one of the ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee before the Bench as “Shri Siddhesh Chaugule” in place of “Shri Siddhant Chandgude” and the date of pronouncement should be read as „10-4-2023‟ instead of „ ___04-2023‟. With these modifications the order of the Tribunal stands.

Hence this corrigendum.

More judgments on Section 144C(5)

All 865 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →