ATUL J. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1853/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 September 2024AY 2009-2010Bench: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)1 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the PAN of the assessee/appellant was incorrectly stated as 'AAZPSO72L' in the original order dated 03/01/2024. The mistake has been rectified.

What were the facts?

This document is a corrigendum to a previous order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench 'A'. The corrigendum addresses an incorrect Permanent Account Number (PAN) mentioned in the cause title of the original order.

What were the issues?

Correction of PAN in the cause title of the original order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CORRIGENDUM 1. In the order, dated 03/01/2024, passed by Mumbai Bench ‘A’ of the Tribunal in the Permanent Account Number of the assessee/appellant has been incorrectly mentioned as ‘AAZPSO72L’ instead of ‘AAZPSO720L’. The said mistake is hereby rectified by way of the present corrigendum and the PAN mentioned as ‘AAZPSO72L’ in the cause title on the first page of the order, dated 03/01/2024, shall stand replaced by and be read as ‘AAZPSO720L’.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →