“miscellaneous application”

AppealsSection 254(2)Section 254(2)1,501 judgments

The decision most relied on for miscellaneous application is 254(2) of the Act. In Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT (295 ITR 466), cited in 35 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on miscellaneous application

254(2) of the Act. In Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT

295 ITR 466 · 2007 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

A mistake apparent from the record that prejudices a party is rectifiable under section 254(2) of the Act.

CIT v. Birla Janahit Trust

208 ITR 372 · 1994 · High Court

citing judgments

Expenditure on salaries and miscellaneous expenses for carrying out the trust's objectives is considered an application of income for charitable purposes. Liabilities for employee benefits, such as gratuity and leave encashment, are accrued liabilities even if payable in the future.

Jagmittar Sain Bhagat v. Director, Health Services

10 SCC 136 · 2013 · Reported

citing judgments

A party can challenge the maintainability of an appeal, even if the delay in filing cross-objections is condoned due to bonafide reasons.

Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. v. Union of India

238 CTR 353 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The Supreme Court held that the provisions for obtaining approval from the Chief Commissioner of Customs and Excise (CoD) had outlived their utility, leading to the recall of previous orders that relied on such approvals.

CIT v. State Bank of Hyderabad

382 ITR 499 · 2016 · Reported

citing judgments

A Tribunal order recalling an earlier order that was dismissed for want of condonation of delay approval is interlocutory and does not adjudicate on merits.

Judgments citing miscellaneous application

Dipen Kumarpal Parekh, Mumbai vs. NFAC- DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1703/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. P.D. Chougule, DR

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(via)

30/08/2023 Dipen Kumarpal Parekh 2 M.A No. 338/Mum/2023 and ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM By way of this Miscellaneous Application, the Revenue is By way of this Miscellaneous Application, the Revenue is By way of this Miscellaneous Application, the Revenue is seeking recall/rectification ... view of the communication of the order to the appellant on view of the communication of the order to the appellant on 15.12.2022, this Miscellaneous Application filed on 20.04.2023 is this Miscellaneous Application filed on 20.04.2023 is this Miscellaneous Application filed on 20.04.2023 is within the limitation period and therefore

Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Gondia vs. Shri Rajendrakumar Hiralal Jain, Gondia

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 300/NAG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.300/Nag/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Income Tax Officer, Shri Rajendrakumar Hiralal Ward-1, Gondia. Vs Jain, Gorelal Chowk, Nagpur, Gondia – 441601. Pan: Abgpj 8488 C

Section 143(3)

Revenue on account of low tax effect. However, if Revenue disagrees with the calculation submitted by the ld.AR, the Revenue is free to file Miscellaneous Application if deemed appropriate. 6. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30th

Hirji Chanabhai Savla, Mumbai vs. DCIT CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 2145/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalehiriji Chanabhai Savla, Vs. Dcit,Cpc, Ground 1Stfloor,Prestigealpha, Floor,Ramniwas, Jerbai Beratenaagrahara Wadia Road, Parel, Begur, Houshr Road, Mumbai-400012. Bengaluru-560100 Maharastra Karnataka. Pan/Gir No. : Amtps0902J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Dinesh Shah Ca.Ar Respondent By : Ms. R.M. Brindha, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing 21.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/ Cit(A) Passed U/S143(1) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri. Dinesh Shah CA.ARFor Respondent: Ms. R.M. Brindha, Sr. AR

Section 143(1)

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/ CIT(A) passed u/s143(1) and U/sec 250 of the Act. 2. The Hon’ble Tribunal in Miscellaneous Application filed by the revenue in MA No. 240/Mum/2023 order dated 27.06.2023 has recalled the Tribunal order dated 18.05.2022 considering the decision

Gajra Differential Gears Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2070/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashat Maharshi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Gajra Differential Gears Ltd. Cit(A) Elve Chambers, Ground Floor, National Faceless Appeal Center Vs. Green Street, Fort, New Delhi Mumbai-400023 Pan/Gir No.Aaacg1586C (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : None : Shri. Swapnil Sawant Revenue By : 01.08.2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 01.08.2023

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Bombay High Court), CIT v/s M/s Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd. 48 taxmann.com 421 and various other decisions. 7. The revenue has filed the miscellaneous application to recall the said order in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services

M/S. Nilamber Dyeing and Bleaching Mills Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 1990/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalenilamber Dyeing & Vs. Ito Circle 5(2)(1), Bleaching Mills Pvt Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, 12/2, Sethia Bhavan Dr. M.K.Road, Dd Sathe Marg, Mumbai-400020. Girgaon-400004, Mumbai Pan/Gir No. : Aabcn8531H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Ms. R.M. Brindha.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/ Cit(A) Passed U/S 143(1) & 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. R.M. Brindha.DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/ CIT(A) passed u/s 143(1) and 250 of the Act. 2. The Hon’ble Tribunal in the Miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue in MA No. 127/Mum/2023 dated 07.07.2023 has recalled the Hon’ble Tribunal order dated 11.05.2022 considering the decision

Srf Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 8978/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Sh. Pradip Kumar Kediasrf Limited Vs. Dcit Unitech Crest Block-C, Circle – 1, Sector – 45, Gurgaon Ltu, New Delhi Haryana – 122 003 Pan No. Aaacs 0206 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri R. K. Kapoor, Adv. Revenue By Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.08.2023

Section 115JSection 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

final assessment order, though, was initially dismissed by the Tribunal due to non- prosecution, however, the order so passed was subsequently recalled while allowing miscellaneous application filed by the assessee. He submitted, the appeal is now pending for disposal before the Tribunal. Proceeding further, he submitted

Mansoor Abdul Kadir Roykar, Mumbai vs. ITO, Int Tax Ward 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, Miscellaneous applications filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 340/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 253Section 254(2)Section 7

Date of Hearing: 21/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 22/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: These are Miscellaneous applications preferred by revenue against the impugned order of this Tribunal dated 10.10.2022 in ITA. Nos.485 & 486/Mum/2022 ... respectively. 2. The revenue has raised the following issue as under: - “2. The present miscellaneous application is being filed in ITA. Nos. 486/Mum/2022 dated 10.10.2022 for AY. 2016-17 in the case of PMT Machines Limited Vs. DCIT Central Circle-2(4). 3. The Hon’ble ITAT has remanded

Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, additional grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4220/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Section 14ASection 80(2)(ii)

AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): In this case the Tribunal had already passed the order vide order dated 24/12/2020. Later on Miscellaneous Application was filed against the said order in ITA No.4220/Mum/2015 and the order was recalled for adjudication of additional ground of appeal. The relevant observation of the Tribunal reads ... towards expenditure incurred in relation to the Investment. The AO may be directed to reduce the disallowance u/s 14A accordingly," 5. In the result, Miscellaneous Application by the assessee is allowed in the terms aforesaid. 2. The brief facts are that assessee had received an amount of Rs.8

Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2525/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Section 14ASection 254(2)Section 438Section 43B

AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal was heard by this Tribunal and order was passed vide order dated 20/12/2019. Thereafter on Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee the order was recalled only for deciding one issue raised in additional ground after observing as under:- “By virtue of this Miscellaneous Application ... recall the order passed by this Tribunal in entirety with regard to ground No.3 of original grounds of appeal. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application Assessee is allowed in the aforesaid terms. 2. We find that in so far as the issue relating to Section 14A has been dealt

Mr. Narayana Nippani Rao, Mumba vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore, Karnataka

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1600/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Mr. Narayana Nippani Rao Adit, Cpc 22, Revati Nofra Near R. C. Church, Bangalore, Karnataka Vs. Colaba, Mumbai-400 005

For Appellant: Shri Karan VakhariaFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Periasamy

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

vide order dated 14.10.2014) and CIT v. Alom Extrusions Limited [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC). The Revenue filed a Miscellaneous Application recalling the said order in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT (in Civil Appeal

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ald Automotive Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes on the afore-said terms of earlier year

ITA 6386/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6386/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit-3(1)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Ald Automotive Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- 13, Floor, Maker 400020. Chamber-Iv, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafca0924K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Agrawal Revenue By: Ms. N. V. Nadkarni (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-8, Mumbai Dated 25.07.2017 For The Ay 2012-13. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That This Is A Second Round Before This Tribunal. In The First Round, The Tribunal Has Passed Order (Ita. No.6386/Mum/2017) By Order Dated 10.04.2019 Wherein The Tribunal Had Adjudicated Ground No. 1 Preferred By The Revenue. But Did Not Adjudicate Ground No. 2 Preferred By Revenue. Therefore, The Revenue Preferred Miscellaneous Application (Ma) No. 573/Mum/2019 Which Was Decided On 02.06.2021, Wherein Tribunal Was Pleased To Recall The Order Passed In The First Round Dated 10.04.2019 For The Limited Purpose Of Adjudicating Ground No. 2. Thus, This Appeal Has Come Up For Hearing For The Limited Purpose Of Adjudicating Ground No. 2 Which Reads As Under: -

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Ms. N. V. Nadkarni (DR)

Section 143(3)

Tribunal had adjudicated ground no. 1 preferred by the revenue. But did not adjudicate ground no. 2 preferred by revenue. Therefore, the revenue preferred Miscellaneous Application (MA) NO. 573/Mum/2019 which was decided on 02.06.2021, wherein Tribunal was pleased to recall the order passed in the first round dated

Amol Capital Markets Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 783/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhamol Capital Markets Vs. Ito 4(1)(1) Private Limited Room No. 636, Aayakar A-106, Motalibai Wadia Bhavan, M.K. Road, Bldg, 22-D Sa Brelvi Mumbai - 400020 Street, Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8022N Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : Rahul Hakani Respondent By : Manoj Kumar Sinha Date Of Hearing 03.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Solitary Ground Of Appeal Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer Of Denying Set Off Of Profit Of F. & O. Transactions & Profit Of Non-Delivery Based Share Against Brought Forward Business Loss. 2. Fact In Brief Is That Return Of Income Declaring Income At Rs.Nil Was Filed On 25.09.2014. The Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act Was Completed On 15.12.2016. The Assessing Officer Has Treated The Brought Forward Loss On The Trading Of F & O As Speculative Loss By Invoking Explanation To Sec. 73 Of The Act & Has Not Allowed The Same To Be Set

For Appellant: Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Manoj Kumar Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43(5)Section 73

Supreme Court in the case of Snowtex Investment Ld. Vs. CIT (105 taxman.com 282) dated 30.04.2019. Subsequently, the assesse has filed miscellaneous application against the above referred decision of ITAT and the ITAT vide M.A. No. 269/Mum/2022 dated 26.06.2023 recalled the above referred order of the ITAT dated 30.04.2019 holding ... pertained to assessment year 2008-09 whereas the case of the assessee is pertained to assessment year 2014-15. The ITAT bench in the miscellaneous application order has also held that assesse did not have any speculative business or loss because assessee was in the business of trading in future

DCIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Rabo India Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 1584/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bledcit – 1(3) V. M/S. Rabo India Finance Ltd., Room No. 564, Aayakar Bhavan Forbes Building, 1St Floor M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Charanjit Rai Marg, Fort Mumbai – 400001 Pan: Aaacr6065R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Nitesh Joshi Department Represented By : Shri Gaurav Batham

Section 147Section 37(1)Section 92C

Conclusion of Hearing : 24.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 18.08.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is recalled vide Miscellaneous Application No. 160/Mum/2022 by observing that the issue raised in Ground Nos. 3 & 4 of ITA.No. 1584/Mum/2014 for the A.Y. 2006-07 have certain mistakes ... needs rectification vide order dated 22.11.2022. Since the mistake M/s. Rabo India Finance Ltd., was apparent on record this Miscellaneous Application was allowed and recalled the issue under consideration for fresh adjudication. 2. Limited Grounds were recalled by the Tribunal for denovo adjudication are Ground No. 3 and 4 raised

ITO, Ward-1(1), Udaipur vs. Sher Singh Choudhary, Udaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 62/JODH/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur16 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteito, Ward-1(1) Vs. Sh. Sher Singh Udaipur, Choudhary Rajasthan Indraprasth Complex, Near Guru Nanak School, Udaipur-313001, Rajasthan. Pan/Gir No. : Aghpc6473C Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Prerana Choudhary, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 16.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Udaipur Order Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Prerana Choudhary

Section 143(3)

provide evidence that the case falls under any of the exceptions provided in the circular issued by the CBDT. The revenue may prefer miscellaneous application for recalling of this order, if they so desire, in which circumstances, this order shall be recalled by the Hon’ble Tribunal

Shri Maheshbhai M.Pandya, Vapi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6, Vapi

In the result, all the grounds of appeals raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 388/SRT/2018[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Surat15 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.388/Srt/2018 (Ay 2008-09) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Shri Maheshbhai M Pandya, Income Tax Officer, 9, Dipkiran Co-Op. Hsc, Ward-6, Vapi, Vs Society, Nr.N.H.-8, Gidc, Vapi-396195 Pan No. Afupp 6452 J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

assessee nor his representative appeared despite service of notice of hearing of appeal. However, the order dated 20.09.2022 was re-called in assessee’s Miscellaneous Application (MA) No.17/SRT/2023, vide order dated 26.06.2023. Thus, this appeal was taken up for hearing Sh. Maheshbhai M Pandya afresh. We find that

Inventys Research Company Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is allowed, while the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1999/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Heta ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 2(24)Section 254(1)Section 254(2)Section 36(1)(va)

Mahita Nair Date of Hearing – 11/08/2023 Date of Order – 11/08/2023 O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The present Miscellaneous Application (“M.A.”) has been filed by the Revenue seeking recall of the order dated 03/08/2022, passed under section 254(1) of the Income ... Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal are dismissed. 11. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is allowed, while the appeal by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 11/08/2023 B.R. BASKARAN SANDEEP

India Tourist and Heritage Village Pvt. Ltd., Mum vs. D.C.I.T. Cent. Cir. -8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 107/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm India Tourist & Heritage The Dy. Commissioner Of Village Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, The Il &Fs Financial Center, Central Circle 8(1), Plot No.C-22, G Block, Room No.656, Vs. Bandra-Kurla Complex, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Bandra(East), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci9294G Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri H.M. Bhatt, Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2023

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt, DR

Section 140Section 143Section 361

also give liberty to the assessee that in future if the liquidator or IRP finds it appropriate to pursue this appeal, on their miscellaneous application the order may be recalled subject to the provisions of the law. 04. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced

Nisschal Jain, Noida vs. ITO Ward - 21(2), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 558/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154

knowledge of the Assessee. Further, the assessee has also taken shelter under the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court made in Miscellaneous Application No. 665/2021 in SMW(C) No. 3 of 2020, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has exempted the computation of the period of the Covid while

M/S the Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 2 (1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, grounds raised in the above appeals are allowed

ITA 335/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Ble & M/S. The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd., V. Addl. Cit/ Dcit Neville House, J.N. Heredia Marg, Range/Circle – 2(1) Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 001 Room No. 561, 5Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Pan: Aaact2328K Mumbai - 400020

Section 45

Hearing : 10.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 04.08.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. The present two appeals are recalled vide Miscellaneous Application Nos. 49 & 50/Mum/2023 by observing that the issue raised in Ground ITA No. 335/MUM/2020 (A.Y. 2009-10) M/s. The Bombay Dyeing ... ITA.No. 2741/Mum/2019 for A.Y. 2010-11 have not been decided vide order dated 05.07.2022. Since the mistake was apparent on record these Miscellaneous Applications were allowed and recalled the issue under consideration for fresh adjudication. 2. At the time of hearing, Ld. AR submitted that the lead case is A.Y.2010-11

The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle - 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, grounds raised in the above appeals are allowed

ITA 2741/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Section 45