JARF INFRA DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 28, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5012/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 October 2019AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal clarifies that the original order's findings, which resulted in the assessee's appeal being partly allowed, will apply mutatis mutandis to the other four similar appeals. This is due to identical facts, circumstances, and nature of transactions.

What were the facts?

This is a corrigendum to a previous ITAT order dated 22.10.2019 concerning appeals for assessment year 2013-14. The corrigendum addresses a typographical mistake in paragraph 14 of the original order.

What were the issues?

The primary issue is the correction of a typographical error in a previous ITAT order that affected the outcome of multiple appeals with similar facts.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CORRIGENDUM I note that due to typographical mistake in para no. 14 at page no. 11 of the Tribunal’s common order dated 22.10.2019 passed in the aforesaid appeals, some mistakes have been crept in. The para no. 14 of the aforesaid order dated 22.10.2019 may now be read as under: - 14. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. Since in all the other four appeals there are similar facts and circumstances and the findings given by the Revenue Authorities, therefore, my findings given above will apply mutatis mutandis in other four appeals also, because the nature of transaction and documents are exactly same.” 2. The rest of the contents of my aforesaid order dated 22.10.2019 will remain unchanged. Sd/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23/10/2019 *Kavita Arora

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →