Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman
शु��प� आदेश /Corrignendum Order The appeal of the assessee in 2013-14 was disposed off by the Division Bench ‘D’, Chennai Benches, Chennai vide order dated 15.03.2021. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has brought to the notice that there is a mistake apparent from record in the cause title mentioning the assessee’s AR (Respondent) name as “Shri G. Baskar” instead of Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, Advocate, who has actually represented the case and prayed for suitable modification of the order mentioning the name of the assessee’s Counsel.
2. On perusal of the records, we find that the assessee has filed Vakalat and PoA in favour of the Advocate company M/s. Lakshmikumarn & Sridharan Attorneys to represent its case before the Tribunal. However, by oversight, while making entry in the order-sheet, the name of the Counsel was wrongly mentioned and thus, there is a mistake apparent from record of the cause title typed in order dated 15.03.2021, which is corrected vide this Corrigendum and it should be read as under:
Year: 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s. Maya Appliance Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. No. 10/5, Old No. 7, Royal Enclave, Corporate Circle 4(1), Besant Avenue, Adyar, Chennai. Chennai 600 020. [PAN: AAACM6280D] (अपीलाथ� /Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) Department by : Ms. R. Anita, JCIT Assessee by : Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 07.01.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 15.03.2021 The order dated 15.03.2021 disposing off the appeal in Chny/2018 stands accordingly modified as per order in this corrigendum to rectify mistake apparent from records. The rest of the order remains same. We order accordingly.
Sd/- Sd/- (S. JAYARAMAN) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, the 24.03.2021 Vm/- आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant, 2.��थ�/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु� (अपील)/CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयु�/CIT, 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR & 6. गाड� फाईल/GF.
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी ’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी धु�ु� आर.एल रे�ी, �ाियक सद� एवं �ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद� के सम� Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./ Year: 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s. Maya Appliance Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. No. 10/5, Old No. 7, Royal Enclave, Corporate Circle 4(1), Besant Avenue, Adyar, Chennai. Chennai 600 020. [PAN: AAACM6280D] (अपीलाथ� /Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) Department by : Ms. R. Anita, JCIT Assessee by : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 07.01.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 15.03.2021 आदेश /O R D E R
PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 8, Chennai dated 02.04.2018 relevant to the assessment year 2013-14.
At the time of hearing, by filing the calculation of computation of tax effect, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the tax effect in the appeal filed by the Revenue is less than the monetary limit of ₹.50,00,000/- fixed by the CBDT to file an appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal as per the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, dated 08.08.2019. The ld. DR fairly conceded the submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. Being so, the Revenue authorities are precluded from filing the appeal before the Tribunal, since the tax effect is less than ₹.50,00,000/- in this appeal and the appeal filed by the Revenue is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. However, the Department is at liberty to seek recall of the above order since, the ld. DR was not sure about as to whether the issue raised in the appeal of the Revenue is not arising out of RAP objection as no specific ground was raised in the grounds of appeal.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on the 15th March, 2021 at Chennai.