“mistake apparent from record”

Aarti Industrial Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 15(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose and appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Bledcit – 15(1)(1) V. M/S. Arti Industries Ltd., Room No. 470, 4Th Floor 71, Udyog Kshetra, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mulund-Goregoaon Link Road Mumbai - 400020 Mulund(W), Mumbai -400080 Pan: Aabca2787L Appellant Respondent & C.O. No. 145/Mum/2019 [Arising Out Of Ita.No. 3583/Mum/2018 (A.Y. 2014-15)] M/S. Arti Industries Ltd., V. Dcit – 15(1)(1) 71, Udyog Kshetra, 2Nd Floor Room No. 470, 4Th Floor Mulund-Goregoaon Link Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mulund(W), Mumbai -400080 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aabca2787L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta Revenue By : Ms. Shailaja Rai & Shri Mehul Jain

counsel, the Tribunal has omitted to give findings on the additional grounds raised by the applicant/assessee, which is in our considered view a mistake apparent from record and requires rectification. 4. Hence, in view of the aforesaid facts and submissions made by the Ld. Counsel, we rectify the mistake apparent ... counsel, the Tribunal has omitted to give findings on the additional grounds raised by the applicant/assessee, which is in our considered view a mistake apparent from record and requires rectification. 4. Hence, in view of the aforesaid facts and submissions made by the Ld. Counsel, we rectify the mistake apparent

Tata Autocomp System Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu)-2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

void. 2. Ground 2: Erroneously passing a rectification order under section 154 of the Act without considering the fact that there is no mistake apparent from record. 2.1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action ... passing a rectification order under section 154 of the Act without considering the fact that there is no mistake apparent from record. Your Appellant prays that such rectification order be treated as null and void. 3. Ground 3: Erroneously adding the profit of INR 3,67,14,142 recorded

Asst. CIT 9 (3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Future Enterprises Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Us:

judicial pronouncements referred by the ld. D.R and observed that thse judicial pronouncements are related to the jurisdiction of the A.O to rectify mistake apparent from record but not pertained to the legal issue which can be entertained at the appellant stage. The fact in the case of the assessee

Luxora Infrastructure P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

Therefore, in the total absence of consideration of the New Information received through FTTR, the appellate decision taken vide order dated 31.10.2019 had mistake apparent from record as the apparent facts of the case were not discussed. As soon as the apparent mistake was noticed, a notice was issued ... view of incomplete facts of the case, nay, without consideration of relevant facts of the case, it is clearly a case of mistake apparent from record. Since the mistake is relating to the apparent facts of the case, which has automatically resulted in a particular decision, while disposing of ground

Sicot India Foundation, Mumbai vs. DCIT(CPC), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Or At, The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal, So As To Enable The Hon. Ita'I To Decide This Appeal According To Law.

either before processing of the u/s 143(1) or even at the time of passing the rectification order, and hence there is no mistake apparent from record in the order sought to be rectified. The action of the AO in rejecting the rectification application of the appellant is found

ITO 25(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Kirit Raojibhai Patel, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned AO is dismissed

Bench: Sri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Sri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm The Income Tax Officer- Kirit Raojibhai Patel 25(2)(5) 5Th Floor Ram Niwas, 34, Room No. 506, C-10, Vallabhnagar, N.S. Road, Vs. Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bkc, Juhu, Vile Parele(W), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabpp3139J Assessee Represented By : Shri Rashmikant Choksey, Ar Department Represented By : Shri K.K. Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2022

possible opinions and therefore it cannot be said that the order of the learned CIT – A was suffering from a mistake apparent from record. It was further held that the learned CIT – A has ignored the principle and basic scope of rectification of the order and hence the order passed ... possible opinions and therefore it cannot be said that the order of the learned CIT – A was suffering from a mistake apparent from record. It was further held that the learned CIT – A has ignored the principle and basic scope of rectification of the order and hence the order passed

Bhoopati Shikshan Sansthan, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.4606/मुं/2019(िन.व. 2014-15) Bhoopati Shikshan Pratisthan, Bajaj Bhavan, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, 226, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaatb1725H ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Post Bag No.2, Electronic City Post Office, Bangalore, Karnataka-560500. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Ms. Vasanti Patel. "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Sanjay Sethi & Sh. B.K. Bagchi, Drs सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 04/02/2022 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 07/02/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 09.05.2019 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15. 2. Ms. Vasanti Patel Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted That The Assessee Is A Charitable Trust Registered Under Section 12A Of The Income

accepted by CPC. The ld. AR asserted that the rectification sought by the assessee under section 154 of the Act is a mistake apparent from record and is not a debatable issue. 4. Per contra, Sh. B.K. Bagchi representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing ... claim of exemption under section 80G/80GGA denied by CPC in 143(1) proceedings is allowable and the denial of same is a mistake apparent on record. 6. The assessee in its return of income for the impugned AY had claimed deduction under Chapter-VIA i.e. under section 80G/80GGA in respect