ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. PRAKASHCHAND LACCHIRAM JAIN, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 296/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 July 2024Bench: SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member), SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The first paragraph of the original order has been corrected to accurately reflect that the appeal was filed by the revenue. No other changes were made to the order dated 02.07.2024.

What were the facts?

This is a corrigendum to a previous order issued by the Tribunal. The correction is made to state that the appeal was filed by the revenue, not the assessee, against the order dated 08.01.2024 of the CIT(Appeals).

What were the issues?

Correction of the party filing the appeal in the initial paragraph of the Tribunal's order. The appeal is against the order of CIT(Appeals) for AY 2017-18.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member

1.

This appeal by the revenue was disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated 02.07.2024. It is noticed that in the first para of the order it is stated that this appeal is filed by the assessee instead of revenue. Therefore the first para is substituted and modified to read as follows:- “ This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order dated 08.01.2024 of the CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [NFAC], for the AY 2017-18 on the following grounds:-

”

2. There is no other change in the order of the Tribunal dated 02.07.2024. Sd/- Sd/- ( BEENA PILLAI ) (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Bangalore, Dated, the 30th July, 2024. /Desai S Murthy / Copy to:

1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr.CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →