DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), JABALPUR vs. ANAND MINING CORPORATION, JABALPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 103/JAB/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 November 2022AY 2014-156 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to correct minor errors and omissions in its previous order to ensure accuracy and clarity. These corrections do not alter the substantive findings or prejudice either party.

What were the facts?

This judgment is a corrigendum order to rectify omissions in a previous order passed by the ITAT. The corrections pertain to various paragraphs and sentences within the original order, aiming to improve clarity and accuracy.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the need to correct clerical and grammatical errors in a previously issued ITAT order. The corrigendum aimed to ensure the order accurately reflected the tribunal's intent and findings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No. 103/JAB/2018
C.O.No. 02/JAB/2018

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

CORRIGENDUM Per Sanjay Arora, AM Order under section 254(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) in the captioned appeals was passed on 21/11/2022. It is, however, found that there have occurred certain omissions in the said order, which are, therefore, hereby sought to be rectified through this corrigendum order. The same being only a correction of those errors, does not therefore per se cause any prejudice to either party. The details are as under:-

1.

In the cause-title, against the names of the counsels, the words ‘Appellant by’ and ‘Respondent by’, be replaced by ‘Revenue by’ and ‘Assessee by’ respectively.

C.O. No. 02/JAB/2018 Dy. CIT vs. Anand Mining Corporation (AY: 2014-15) 2. At para 2.1 (pg. 2), the word ‘the’ be read before the word ‘assessee’ in the first sentence.

3.

Para 2.2 (pg.3), the words ‘para 7.1.3’ be read before the word ‘pgs.’ 4. Para 3.1, at pg. 6, comma (,) be inserted before the words ‘is warranted that…..’ 5. Para 3.3 (pg. 10), the words ‘comprising Bills/CNs in the main’ be read before the words ‘clearly states, as required…….’, and the words ‘, also clarified w.r.t. the reply furnished in rectification proceedings’ be inserted at the end of the same sentence.

6.

Para 3.4 (a) The words ‘which, in view of the AO,’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘The words ‘Besides this’,……’ (at pg. 11), be omitted. (b) The words ‘or otherwise’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘The assessee, who did not……’ (at pg.11) be read as within brackets.

7.

a) The word ‘backgrounds’ be read as ‘background’ in the first sentence of para 3.5 (pg.12) b) In para 3.5, the words ‘, under the given facts and circumstances (and the law in the matter,)’ be omitted, and the words ‘, producing the details’, be read after the words ‘requiring the assessee to’ in the first sentence (pg. 12) c) The words ‘(per it’s reply filed on 09/01/2017)’ be read after the words ‘, who claims’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘Two, once the assessee clarifies….’ (Para 3.5 (A), at pg. 13) 8. a) The words ‘as sought,’ be read after the words ‘bills/contract notes evidencing the transactions,’ in para 3.6 (pg.16) b) Para 3.6, the words ‘claims’ be read as ‘claim’, i.e., in the second last sentence of the said para, at pg. 17. 9. a) Para 3.7 (pg.17) the word ‘the’ be read before the words ‘rectification proceedings as being….’ and the word ‘is’ be omitted, in the first sentence. 2 C.O. No. 02/JAB/2018 Dy. CIT vs. Anand Mining Corporation (AY: 2014-15) b) The word ‘derivative’ after the words ‘trade in commodity’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘That is, that it is a commodity derivative trading………’, at pg.18, be omitted.

10.

Para 3.8 a) The words ‘or qua proved facts (viz. the registration of the brokers, or the commodity exchanges being notified/SEBI approved) in the rectification proceedings,’ be read after the words ‘produced in assessment (viz. bills/CN),’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘The assessee may, toward this,…’(at pg.20) b) The words ‘giving rise to the initiation of rectification proceedings’ be read after the words ‘inference of a mistake’ in the following sentence of the said para, beginning with the words ‘The restriction qua the material on record’, and the word ‘it’s preceding’ the word ‘assessment’ therein be read as ‘an’ (pg.20) c) The words ‘the sole decision’ be read before the words ‘relied upon by the assessee’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘The decision in….’ (pg.20-21) d) The words ‘(even as others, not adverted to, are placed on file), be read before the words ‘holding in ratio….’ in the said sentence. And the words ‘, i.e., if not understood as being only toward the inference as to a ‘mistake’ be read after the last word of the said sentence, and the word ‘defeats’ in the said sentence be read as ‘ousts’.

11.

Para 3.9 a) The words ‘the loss on’ after the words ‘which requires’ in the third sentence of the para, beginning with the words ‘The ‘mistake’ that attends…..’ be omitted. b) The word ‘for’ be read for the word ‘in’ occurring after the words ‘his total income’ in the said sentence, and the word ‘transaction’ therein after the word ‘speculative’ be read as ‘transactions’.

C.O. No. 02/JAB/2018 Dy. CIT vs. Anand Mining Corporation (AY: 2014-15) c) The words ‘, but was again not’ be read after the words ‘in rectification proceedings’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘All that therefore…’ (pg.22) d) the words ‘, claiming instead of the AO having held the impugned loss as speculative u/s. 43(5)(e)’ be read after the words ‘the latter not so’ in the following sentence, beginning with the words ‘On the contrary,….’ (at pg.22) e) The words ‘pure’ and ‘its’ in the sentence beginning with ‘Why, he even fails……’ be read as ‘derivative’ and ‘it’s’ respectively (at pg.22) f) The words ‘(refer para 7.1.3 (vi) & (vii) of his order)’ be read after the words ‘debatable!’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘Further, while he regards….’ (at pg.22) 12. Para 4 (a) A comma (,) be read after the words ‘during assessment’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘There was, however, no whisper….’ (pg.23) b) The words ‘through the members of’ be read as ‘in’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘Section 43(5) being clearly attracted….’ (at pg.23-24 of the order) c) A comma (,) be read after the words ‘apparent from record’ in the following sentence of the para, beginning with the words ‘The set off of….’ (pg.24) d) The words ‘satisfying herself’ be read in place of the words ‘ascertaining’ in the sentence beginning with the words ‘The AO, however,….’ (at pg.24). The words ‘as claimed before her,’ be read after the words ‘defining speculative transaction’ in the same sentence. (pg. 24) e) A comma (,) be read after the words ‘Her order’ in the sentence beginning with the said words, and the words ‘(see Asok Textiles Ltd. (supra))’ be read at the end of the said sentence.

C.O. No. 02/JAB/2018 Dy. CIT vs. Anand Mining Corporation (AY: 2014-15) f) The words ‘(also refer Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC))’ be read after the words ‘in appeal’ in the following sentence, beginning with the words ‘The same ought to have….’ (pg.24) g) The words ‘(para 3.9)’ be read after the words ‘detail hereinbefore’ in the following sentence, beginning with the words ‘However, as again…..’ (pg.24) h) The words ‘w.r.t. proven facts’ be read after the words ‘in accordance with law’ in the last sentence of sub-para 1 of para 4 (at pg.24) The word ‘as even’ be read as ‘even as’ in the second sentence of the 2nd i) sub-para, beginning with the words ‘The whole premise….’ (pg.24) j) The words ‘Toward these aspects, the’ be read in place of the words ‘The’ in the following sentence, beginning with the words ‘The facts….’ (pg.24) k) The word ‘relevant’ be read after the word ‘striking’ in the following sentence, beginning with the words ‘The facts of….’ (pg.24-25) l) The words ‘(viz. Karamchand Premchand (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 200 ITR 268 (SC); T.S. Rajam (supra))L. Hirday Narain (supra), Asok Textiles Ltd. (supra)…..’ be read as ‘(viz. L.Hirday Narain (supra); S. Sankappa & Ors. (supra); Karamchand Premchand (P.) Ltd. (supra); Perfect Pottery Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1996] 221 ITR 210, 213 (MP); T.S. Rajam (supra))’ at the end of the last sentence of this sub-para (at pg.25)

Sd/- Sd/- (Manomohan Das) (Sanjay Arora) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 22/11/2022 vr/- C.O. No. 02/JAB/2018 Dy. CIT vs. Anand Mining Corporation (AY: 2014-15) Copy to: 1. The Appellant: Deputy CIT (Central), Jabalpur 2. The Respondent: M/s. Anand Mining Corporation, 1, Khitola Bazar, Jabalpur - 483225 3. The Principal CIT-1, Jabalpur 4. The CIT(Appeals)-1, Jabalpur 5. The CIT-D.R., ITAT, Jabalpur 6. Guard File By order

(VUKKEM RAMBABU) Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Jabalpur.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →