Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad

Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(1), ... vs Lanco Hills Technology Park Private ... on 26 August, 2022

              आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण , है द राबाद पीठ म
              IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
               HYDERABAD BENCHES "B", HYDERABAD

                           BEFORE
         SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
                              &
           SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER


                  िव.आवे . सं / M.A. No. 111/Hyd/2021
                 (Arising out of ITA No. 1126/Hyd/2018)
                (िनधारण वष / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

         Income Tax Officer,             Lanco Hills Technology
         Ward-16(1),                Vs   Park Private Limited,
         Hyderabad                       Hyderabad
                                         [PAN : AABCL1228R]
          (आवेदक / Applicant)             ( यथ / Respondent)


                     िनधा रती ारा / Assessee by:   Shri M.V.Joshi, AR
                     राज व ारा / Revenue by:       Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR


                      सु न वाई की तारीख /Date of hearing:
                                                        26/08/2022
                      घोषणा की तारीख /Pronouncement on: 26/08/2022


                               आदे श / ORDER

PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JM:

By way of this miscellaneous application, Revenue prays the rectification mistake that had crept in the common order dated 07/09/2021 passed in ITA No. 1125 & 1126/Hyd/2018 for assessment years 2007-08 & 2011-12.

M.A.No. 111/Hyd/2021

2. At the outset, learned DR submitted that in paragraph No. 12, it was recorded that the Revenue did not dispute the claim of the assessee as to the presence of on-money element in this case. He submitted that, as a matter of fact, Revenue did not give any such concession and on the other hand, the Tribunal followed the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chainrup Sampathram Vs. CIT (1953) 24 ITR 481 (SC), to grant relief to the assessee on this aspect. He, therefore, prayed that this observation which has crept in, in the common order may be omitted.

3. Learned AR on the other hand fairly conceded the mistake apparent on the face of record and reported no objection for deleting the same.

4. Recording the same, we rectify the mistake that is crept in, in the common order. The portion of the paragraph No. 12 of the order, which reads, - "We wish to emphasise that the Revenue is fair enough in not having disputed the assessee's claim in principle. Or that the same contained any "on money" element, as well" shall stand omitted.

5. In the result, this MA is allowed, accordingly.

Order pronounced in the open court on this the 26th day of August, 2022 Sd/- Sd/-

 (RAMA KANTA PANDA)                               (K. NARASIMHA CHARY)
 ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                   JUDICIAL MEMBER

Hyderabad,
Dated: 26/08/2022

TNMM




                                                                  Page 2 of 3
                                                          M.A.No. 111/Hyd/2021




Copy forwarded to:

1. Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(1), Hyderabad.

2. Lanco Hills Technology Park Private Limited, C/o. P. Murali & Co., Chartered Accountants, 6-3-655/2/3, 1st Floor, Somajiguda, Hyderabad.

3. CIT(Appeals)-4, Hyderabad.

4. Pr.CIT-4, Hyderabad.

5. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad.

6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, HYDERABAD Page 3 of 3