SHRI SHRI (DR.) HARI SINGH CHANDEL,CHAMPA (CG) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), BILASPUR(CG)

PDF · subscribers
ITA 287/BIL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 January 2023AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the corrigendum application was not maintainable as it was not filed by the assessee appellant as required by the Income Tax Rules and the Income-tax Act. The assessee was given liberty to file it again as per the prescribed procedure.

What were the facts?

The assessee's counsel filed a corrigendum application to rectify clerical mistakes in a previous ITAT order. The application was filed on behalf of the assessee, not by the assessee himself.

What were the issues?

Whether a corrigendum application filed by the counsel on behalf of the assessee is maintainable. Whether the application was filed in accordance with the prescribed procedure for appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 140

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CORRIGENDUM The present corrigendum application seeking rectification of certain clerical mistakes in the order passed by the Tribunal while disposing off 2 Dr. Hari Singh Chandel Vs. ITO, Ward-2(2) the appeal in for A.Y 2011-12, dated 17.10.2022 has been filed before us on 02.11.2022. On a perusal of the aforesaid application, we find that the same had been filed not by the assessee appellant but by his counsel. As an appeal in Form No.36 r.w. Rule 47(1) r.w. Rule 45(3) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 read a/w. Section 140 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) is required to be signed by the individual appellant (except for where it is not possible for the individual to so verify), therefore, the corrigendum application is also to be similarly filed by the assessee appellant.

More judgments on Section 140

All 100 judgments and leading authorities on Section 140 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →