DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI vs. SHRI VARALAKSHMI COMPANY, SALEM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 743/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 March 2024AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal considered the assessee's application and allowed the requested corrections. These changes were inserted into the original order, modifying specific dates, replacing names, deleting a paragraph, and renumbering other paragraphs.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application requesting a corrigendum to a previous ITAT order. The application sought to correct specific dates, names, and paragraphs within the original judgment.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the correction of factual errors and omissions in a previously issued ITAT order, as requested by the assessee through a corrigendum application.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

The appellant has filed an application requesting for issue of corrigendum, dated 26.02.2024 with reference to order of the Tribunal dated 24.01.2024, in 744 & 745/Chny/2023 & CO Nos. 45, 46 & 47/Chny/2023 for assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19.

2.

We have considered the application filed by the assessee and after going through the pleading of the applicant in their application dated 26.02.2024, in light of the order of Tribunal

:-2-: 743 to 745/Chny/2023 & CO Nos: 45 to 47/Chny/2023 dated 24.01.2024, we find that the following corrigendum is inserted to the order of the Tribunal dated 24.01.2024, ITA Nos. 743, 744 & 745/Chny/2023 & CO Nos. 45, 46 & 47/Chny/2023 for assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19.

3.

In Para 3 of Page 5, the date of return filed in response to notice u/s. 153C of the Act, date should be treated as 04.03.2021, instead of 16.02.2021.

4.

In Para 4 of Pages 16 and 18, wherever the word ‘Appu’ is referred, it should be replaced with ‘Varalakshmi’.

5.

In Para 12 of Page 25, wherever the word ‘Appu’ is referred, the same should be replaced with ‘Varalakshmi’.

6.

In Para 13 of Pages 28 to 32 is hereby totally deleted from the order.

7.

In Para 14 of Pages 32 & 33, ground no. 3 should be replaced in place of ground no. 2.5. Further, in place of Paras 66 & 67, it should be read as Paras 43 & 44.

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →