THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), BHILAI vs. M/S SHREE ARIHANT TRADE LINKS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BHILAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 61/RPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 January 2023AY 2009-10Bench: 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 Act. The assessee was given liberty to file it 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 by the counsel, not the assessee directly.

What were the issues?

Whether a corrigendum application filed by the counsel, instead of the assessee appellant, is maintainable before the ITAT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 140

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.57/RPR/2018
ITA No. 61/RPR/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

CORRIGENDUM The present corrigendum application seeking rectification of certain clerical mistakes in the order passed by the Tribunal while disposing off the appeal in & A.Y 2009- 10, dated 17.10.2022 has been filed before us on 16.11.2022. 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.

2.

We, thus, in light of the aforesaid infirmity in the corrigendum application filed before us, hold the same as not maintainable with a liberty to the assessee to prefer the same as per the prescribed procedure.

3 M/s. Shree Arihant Tradelinks India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CC-1(1) & 61/RPR/2018 (Corrigendum)

Accordingly, the corrigendum application filed by the assessee, dated 15.11.2022 is rejected as not maintainable in terms of our aforesaid observations.

More judgments on Section 140

All 100 judgments and leading authorities on Section 140 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →