DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SHERATON INTL. LLC, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4245/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 March 2019AY 2009-102 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal corrected a typographical error in its previous order. The correction clarifies that the issue is squarely covered by a Delhi High Court decision in favor of the assessee. This correction does not alter the original decision.

What were the facts?

This is a corrigendum to a previous ITAT order. A typographical error was identified in paragraph 6 of the original order dated 11.03.2019. The correction involves a minor change in wording regarding the applicability of a Delhi High Court decision.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the correction of a typographical error in a previous tribunal order. The error related to the interpretation of a High Court decision's applicability to the assessee's case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CORRIGENDUM IN ORDER DATED 11.03.2019 PER BENCH.

1.

It has come to our notice that in the order dated 11/03/2019 in to 4247/Del/2015 for Assessment Year 2008-09 to 2011-12 certain typographical error at para No. 6 has crept in where it has been mentioned as under:- “6. The learned departmental representative reiterated what is stated in the assessment order whereas the learned authorised representative submitted that issue is not squarely covered by the decision of the honourable Delhi High Court in favour of the assessee in assessee’s own case.”

2.

Now it shall read as under:- “6. The learned departmental representative reiterated what is stated in the assessment order whereas the learned authorised representative submitted that issue is now squarely covered by the decision of the honourable Delhi High Court in favour of the assessee in assessee’s own case.”

3.

This correction is minor correction and therefore does not prejudice either of the parties and does not change the decision of the bench.

4.

The registry is directed to serve upon both the parties above corrigendum which will substitute relevant paragraphs in the order passed by the coordinate bench. The Parties are directed to bring the same to the notices of various concerned authorities and Hon’ble courts, wherever this order is referred. - - (AMIT SHUKLA) (PRASHANT MAHARISHI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 13/03/2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →