UPS JETAIR EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 11(1)(2), MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal agreed to rectify the errors. The corrigendum directs that the correct name of the assessee and the names of the authorized representatives be reflected in the order.
What were the facts?
The assessee, M/s. UPS Express Private Limited, sought a corrigendum to a previous ITAT order. The original order contained typographical errors in the names of the assessee and its authorized representatives.
What were the issues?
Correction of typographical errors in the cause title and names of authorized representatives in an ITAT order.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J”, BENCH
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM
CORRIGENDUM O R D E R
By virtue of this Corrigendum, the assessee seeks to rectify following errors crept in SA No.252/Mum/2019 dated 27/09/2019.
We have gone through the letter dated 27/09/2019 of the assessee and found that assessee seeks to add the ld. AR names of Mr. Percy Pardiwalla and Mr. Nitesh Joshi. Therefore, we hereby issue this corrigendum and direct to read the names of ld. AR as Mr. Bipin Dhodia, Mr. Percy Pardiwalla and Mr. Nitesh Joshi.
SA No.252/Mum/2019 M/s. UPS Express Pvt. Ltd.,
There is a typographical error in the name of the assessee in the order dated 27/09/2019 passed by the Tribunal in the aforesaid appeal. The correct name of the assessee is “M/s. UPS Express Private Limited (Formerly known as M/s.UPS Jetair Express Private Limited),” however, it has wrongly been typed as “M/s. UPS Jetair Express Private Limited (Formerly known as Jetair Express Private Limited) in the cause title of the aforesaid order. Therefore, we hereby issue this corrigendum and direct that the name of the assessee be read as “M/s. UPS Express Private Limited (Formerly known as M/s. UPS Jetair Express Private Limited).
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026