ACIT v. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd.

305 ITR 227Supreme Court of India2008#151 most cited

What is ACIT v. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. authority for?

Non-consideration of a decision by a jurisdictional High Court or the Supreme Court constitutes a mistake apparent from the record. However, non-consideration of a non-jurisdictional High Court decision does not typically amount to such a mistake.

470

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. · Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange · mistake apparent from record · section 154 · section 254(2) · rectification of mistake · non-consideration jurisdictional High Court · non-consideration Supreme Court · judicial precedent oversight · error on record · 305 ITR 227

Also reported as

173 Taxmann 322

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 147Section 143(1)Section 263Section 142(1)Section 148
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 254(2)mistake apparent from recordmistake apparent on recordsection 2(24)section 254miscellaneous applicationsection 36(1)(va)section 43bsection 36(1)section 154section 36section 25

Judgments citing ACIT v. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd.

ACIT, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1804/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…sdictional High Court are mistakes apparent from record rectifiable u/s. 254(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961. For this proposition, reliance can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd (2008) 173 Taxmann 322 (SC). We, therefore, amend the consolidated order dated 08.07.2011 of the Tribunal passed in respect of Ground No. 2 of the appeal of the Revenue in assessment year 2007-08, Ground No. 5 in assessment year 2002-03, Ground No. 2 in assessment year 2004-05, Ground No. 2 in assessment year 2005-06 and Grounf No. 2 in assessment year 2006- 07 dir…

ACIT, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1803/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…sdictional High Court are mistakes apparent from record rectifiable u/s. 254(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961. For this proposition, reliance can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd (2008) 173 Taxmann 322 (SC). We, therefore, amend the consolidated order dated 08.07.2011 of the Tribunal passed in respect of Ground No. 2 of the appeal of the Revenue in assessment year 2007-08, Ground No. 5 in assessment year 2002-03, Ground No. 2 in assessment year 2004-05, Ground No. 2 in assessment year 2005-06 and Grounf No. 2 in assessment year 2006- 07 dir…

ACIT, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1802/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…sdictional High Court are mistakes apparent from record rectifiable u/s. 254(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961. For this proposition, reliance can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd (2008) 173 Taxmann 322 (SC). We, therefore, amend the consolidated order dated 08.07.2011 of the Tribunal passed in respect of Ground No. 2 of the appeal of the Revenue in assessment year 2007-08, Ground No. 5 in assessment year 2002-03, Ground No. 2 in assessment year 2004-05, Ground No. 2 in assessment year 2005-06 and Grounf No. 2 in assessment year 2006- 07 dir…

ACIT, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1801/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…sdictional High Court are mistakes apparent from record rectifiable u/s. 254(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961. For this proposition, reliance can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd (2008) 173 Taxmann 322 (SC). We, therefore, amend the consolidated order dated 08.07.2011 of the Tribunal passed in respect of Ground No. 2 of the appeal of the Revenue in assessment year 2007-08, Ground No. 5 in assessment year 2002-03, Ground No. 2 in assessment year 2004-05, Ground No. 2 in assessment year 2005-06 and Grounf No. 2 in assessment year 2006- 07 dir…

ACIT, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1671/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…sdictional High Court are mistakes apparent from record rectifiable u/s. 254(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961. For this proposition, reliance can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd (2008) 173 Taxmann 322 (SC). We, therefore, amend the consolidated order dated 08.07.2011 of the Tribunal passed in respect of Ground No. 2 of the appeal of the Revenue in assessment year 2007-08, Ground No. 5 in assessment year 2002-03, Ground No. 2 in assessment year 2004-05, Ground No. 2 in assessment year 2005-06 and Grounf No. 2 in assessment year 2006- 07 dir…

Grishma Securities P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 7130/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kishnadwala-ARFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Vispute-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “ जी जी जी” खंडपीठ जी Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“G”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, "याियक राम लाल नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/7130/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2006-07 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Grishma Securities Pvt.Ltd. ITO- 4(1)(2) 620,P J Tower,Dalal Street, Mumbai. Vs. Fort,Mumbai-400 0…

Nanjing Electric (Group) Co. Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1124/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 1124/Del/2015 Ay: 2011-12 M/S Nanjing Electric Vs. Dcit, Circle 2(2)(2), International Taxation, (Group) Co. Ltd., New Delhi No. 63, Taixin Road, Nanjing China (Pan: Aadcn3651Q) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. I.P. Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. M. Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 195Section 234B

…hus, Tribunal was directed to hear and decide the appeal on merits. The order of Tribunal was dated 18.10.2016 and M.A. was filed by the assessee on 08.03.2018 that is beyond the period of 6 months and the copy of ACIT vs. Saurasht5a Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. 305 ITR 227 (SC). We have especially gone through the order of the Tribunal dated 22.2.2013 in the case of the assessee passed in ITA No. 6175Del/2012 (AY 2009-10), which the assessee has attached with Paper Book page no. 10-18. The relevant portion of the aforesaid Tribunal’s decision in assessee’s own case is reproduced as under:- 5. After hearing both th…

Emcee Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 11, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 253/KOL/2016[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 264

…t of this contention, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Suhrid Geigy Limited –vs.- CIT reported in 237 ITR 834 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT –vs.- Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Limited reported in 305 ITR 227, wherein it was held that if the point is covered by a decision of the jurisdictional High Court rendered prior or even subsequent to the relevant order, it could be said to be a mistake apparent from the record. When it was brought to his notice that the claim for exemption on account of the amount of financial assistance in question was not eve…

Smt Kalyani Kumar, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2350/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

Mr Sreedhar Mukhopadhyay, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2349/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

Mr Gautam Mitra, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2348/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

Smt Soma Mitra, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2347/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

Smt Lata Pandey, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2346/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

Smt Sonali Kundu, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2345/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

Smt Shampa Nair, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2344/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

Smt Papia Bhandari, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2343/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

Smt Jayanti Mitra, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2342/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

Mr Debashis Mukherjee, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2341/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

Smt Smita Chatterjee, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-22, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 2340/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.2340/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt. Smita Chatterjee Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Pan: Actpc0105B) Circle-22, Kolkata. 99B, Kumarpara Lane, Kolkata-700042 (Appellant) (Respondent) &

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154

…her or not these decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court can be subject matter of rectification under section 154. On this question, we find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of ACIT - vs - Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (305 ITR 227) wherein Their Lordships have held that non-consideration of a judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is also a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified under section 154. What follows, inter alia, is that in a situation in which Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is not followed, such a non-consideration is clearly a mistake appa…

M/S. Meherina Co-Oerative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO 16(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 5527/MUM/2006[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.5527 /Mum/2006 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2003-04) बनधम/ Mahindra Co-Operative Income Tax Officer 16(2)(1), Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai. Vs. 51C, Nepean Sea Road, Mumbai-400026 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aaaam3083G अपीऱार्थी ओर से / Assessee By Shri Manish Shah प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Revenue By Shri Premanand J सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 12.5.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement :17.5.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, A. M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.7.2006 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 25, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called As The Cit(A) For Assessment Year 2003-04. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Various Grounds Raised In This Appeal Were Decided Vide Order Dated 16.09.2008 Passed By The Mumbai Bench Of The Tribunal In Ita No.5527/Mum/2006. Thereafter Vide Miscellaneous Application No.586/M/2012 Dated 11.09.2012 Decision Rendered On The Ground No. 2 Of The Present Appeal I.E Ita No 5527/Mum/2006 Was Sought To Be 2 Rectified & Amended As It Contained An Apparent Mistake Which Had Arisen Because Of Decision Of The Jurisdictional High Court Rendered In The Case Of Sind Co-Operative Housing Society Reversing The Decision Of The Mumbai Special Bench In The Case Of Walkeshwar Triveni Co-Op.Housing Soceity Ltd By Which The Issue Of Taxability Of Transfer Fee Received On Transfer Of Flat From The Transferor Was Decided & Held To Be Non Taxable Receipt On The Principle Of Mutuality. 3. The Relevant Finding Of The Tribunal In The Order Passed In The Miscellaneous Application No 586/M/2012 Is Reproduced Below:

Section 254(2)

…e, as it is well settled that a subsequent judgment rendered by a Jurisdictional High Court on the issue, can constitute an error apparent on record. We rely on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ACIT v/s Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd., (2008) 305 ITR 227 (SC)." 4. Thus, it is clear that an identical issue has been considered in the Miscellaneous Application by the Tribunal and the order of the Tribunal dated 27.9.2007 was recalled. Following the earlier order as reproduced above we recall the order dated 16.9.2008 of this Tribunal for the assessment year 2003-04 to the extent of ground no. 6 for…