CLETA REAL ESTATE P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-2, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal rectified a typographical mistake in its previous order. The corrected operative part of the order states that the revenue's appeal is dismissed and the assessee's appeal is allowed.
What were the facts?
This is a corrigendum to a previous ITAT order dated 8.7.2021. The original order dealt with appeals for assessment year 2014-15. The corrigendum clarifies a typographical error in the concluding paragraph of the original order.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was to correct a factual error in the pronouncement of the tribunal's decision regarding the dismissal of the revenue's appeal and the allowance of the assessee's appeal.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
By this corrigendum we rectify a typographical mistake in our order dated 8.7.2021 in & 13 instead of “ In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed ; the appeal of the assessee is allowed” it is typed “In the result the appeal of the revenue as well as assessee is allowed “ . We rectify this mistake as under :-
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
