More care required in adopting copy and paste method, using old format in new orders - with example of a recent short order of ITAT containing some serious mistakes.

[DEV KUMAR KOTHARI]

More care required in adopting copy and paste method, using old format  in new  orders - with example of a recent short order of ITAT containing some serious mistakes.

Earlier articles on related subjects:

Beware of unwanted errors or slippages while typing on computers.

By: DEV KUMAR KOTHARI  May 10, 2022

Short-cut dictation and typing technology in form of ‘copy- paste’ or ‘copy-cut- paste’ should be very carefully done with proper application of mind. With observations and concern of the Supreme Court.

An Article By: - DEV KUMAR KOTHARI  April 30, 2022

Short order in present study:

VISHNU SUGAR MILLS LTD. VERSUS I.T.O., WARD-10 (4) , KOLKATA [2022 (6) TMI 649 - ITAT KOLKATA]

VISHNU SUGAR MILLS LTD. VERSUS I.T.O., WARD-10 (4) , KOLKATA -however, in the reported order some items has been  missed or omitted , may be as per format or editorial policy.

In earlier two articles author had discussed important aspects about use of new methods and  ITES based technologies in activities of dictation, typing, drafting, review and editing, and finalizing  documents.

In screen based review and editing there are shortcomings of missing some aspects, therefore, in case of serious matters involving extensive use of numbers by way of dates, and other data, it is always advisable to have a print for review and correction.

However, in zeal of disposing off work as fast as possible, this process is skipped leaving some mistakes in nature of omission, duplication, selection of wrong words etc.

Professionals have experience that many times officers, Tribunal members, Judges takes even some petty mistakes in typing and presentation  of documents very seriously and can show displeasure and disappointment to counsels,  which can be considered as inappropriate  and insulting behavior. Though it is true that such mistakes should not occur when a document is filed by or through a professional, yet ground realities must be recognized.

Like professionals government officers, Tribunal members, and Judges are also expected to ensure that in their notices and orders mistakes are not found. However, we find that at that end of officers casual approach is followed. Orders are found with many mistakes and ambiguities. The result  in the order is considered  important, and effect to be given is in favors and is not likely to be adversely effected due to any such mistakes, litigants generally do not point out such mistakes to the concerned authorities.

Mistakes causes wrong impression:

Mistakes in orders can causes wrong impression about the institution and the concerned officers. Senior Government officers, members of Tribunals and judges of Courts are equipped with good equipments, and good personal secretaries, who are highly paid, and other clerical team which can ensure that there are no silly mistakes in orders and notices. However, we find that casual approach is adopted and many mistakes can be noticed in notices and orders.

Some mistakes can lead to wrong inferences and conclusions in future also:

Some mistakes can cause wrong inferences after long period of time when any order is relied in other cases. Author recall that in some orders of Tribunal provisions of S.115J, 115JA and 115JB were considered in a bunch  of appeals including cross appeals.

In order related to S.115JB, due to typing mistake at few places S.115JA was typed. This was inadvertent mistake having not much significance when order was read in totality because grounds of appeal , order of lower authorities extracted , submissions all contained reference to S.115JB. For that year S115JB was applicable and not S. 115JA.  The assessee got relief allowed, so rectification petition was not made.

Similarly in another case  which was only for one year and in that year S.115JB was applicable, at all places S.115JB was mentioned , however, in conclusion S.115J was wrongly typed.

When these orders were relied on and  placed before another bench  for consideration, in case reported as ACIT, RANGE-2, BAREILLY VERSUS M/S L.H. SUGAR FACTORY LTD. AND VICA-VERSA [2016 (3) TMI 367 - ITAT LUCKNOW]

The another bench  that is ITAT Lucknow, did not accept that the order in case of Vishnu Sugar and Sasamusa Sugar was  on  S.115JB and therefore, did not follow the order. Though the stand taken by  Lucknow bench was unreasonable because an inadvertent typing mistake was given importance ignoring  entire order including grounds of appeal , orders of lower authorities, submissions of litigants, which clearly  mentioned  that is it on issue of S.115JB and not S.115JA for the particular year for which appeal order related in case of Vishnu  Sugar and Sasamusa Sugar.

Recent short order of ITAT , Kolkata:

  In the table below order of ITAT is reproduced in left column and in right column remarks and observations are given by author.

Places where a mistake is found / some words  are  felt missing  are marked in  red color.

From order with red marks where some mistakes appears.	Observations of author
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “C” KOLKATA
Before: Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member, and Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member
ITA No.1068/Kol/2019 Assessment Year:2014-15
Vishnu Sugar Mills Ltd. C-3/3 Gillander House 8 N.S Road, Kolkata-700 001. बनाम V/s. I.T.O., Ward-10(4), Kolkat
PAN: AAACV9724B
Hearing through video Conferencing	There was physical hearing, D.R. was present and heard. As per order dt.  30.05.2022for  constitution of benches the hearing was in physical Court. subsequently also there was no notification for virtual hearing and any link was not provided.
By Appellant : None	It should be Appellant by : or for appellant:
By Respondent : Shri Tushal Dhawal Singh, CIR/DR	It should be Respondent By:  or for respondent:
Date of Hearing 09-06-2022
Date of Pronouncement 13-06 -2022
O R D E R
Per Sonjoy Sarma, JM :
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 26-03-2018 passed by the of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), [in short, the ld. CIT(A)], Kolkata-4, Kolkata which in turn arises out of assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( in short, the ‘Act’) by ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata on 19/12/2016 for the A.Y 2014-15.	The appeal was preferred  against order of Pr.CIT u.s.263.  This is also clear from next paragraph of the order. So there is typing mistake by which CIT(A) has been mentioned.
2. No body appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, at the time of hearing of the case, it is brought to our notice that an Application for withdrawal was filed by the appellant-assessee through its managing director on 8.3.2022 stating that after the order passed by the ld. PCIT-4, Kolkata u/s. 263 a fresh order u/s. 143(3) / 263 dated 20.12.2019 was also passed by the AO and did not make any adverse decision or additions and concluded same as original assessment u/s. 143(3) and as such no grievance of the assessee against the order passed u/s. 263 by ld. PCIT 4 , Kolkata. In consequent of that appeal of the assessee may, therefore, treated as infructuous and withdrawn
3. We, after perusal of above application and hearing the ld.DR on this issue since he has no objection for such withdrawal of appeal by appellant. This appeal may be treated as infructuous and dismissed on withdrawal.
4. In view of above, the appeal of assessee is treated as dismissed on withdrawn.
5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed
The order pronounced in the open Court on 13 -06-2022

Therefore, we find that even in a very short order, many mistakes have taken place. Many of such mistakes are due to carelessness of Personal Secretaries of members.  These should be avoided by making Personal Secretaries  more attentive and by adopting practice of careful reading of   order  before signing. A careful reading must have cause correction .

Although it is advisable to get rectified above mistakes, to avoid any confusion in future. However, the order is not to affect the assessee as well as the Assessing Officer because status quo as per existing order is maintained.

Therefore, it is likely that any party will not apply for rectification of order on above issues. This is also because normal human being do not like that any other person should point out his mistakes. Pointing out such mistakes , as per experience, is considered as insulting by general human beings, and Government Officers, having egos so high, are likely to consider it insulting and annoy him, if some one point out such mistakes.