9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 543X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Sathe i/by Aarti Sathe For the Respondent : Mr. Arvind Pinto ORDER PC: In these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has assailed the order dated 21 March 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) on the petitioner's Misc. Application for rectification of order dated 22 April 2008 under Section 254(2) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on by the assessee i.e. Sharad Construction Co. vs. ACIT, ITA No.5839 to 5842/Mum./2007, order dated 22nd April 2008 and Manish Maheshwari vs. ACIT, (2007) 289 ITR 341 (SC). The impugned order holds that so far as the first issue is concerned, no submissions were advanced at the original hearing leading to order dated 22 April 2008. So far as the second issue is concerned, it was held that the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd. 256 ITR 295. Thus, the rectification application filed by the petitioner in respect of the order dated 22 April 2008 ought to have been allowed. 4) Mr. Pinto learned Counsel for the revenue repeats and reiterates the findings recorded in the impugned order dismissing the petition. 5) We find that this Court in the matter of Tata Chemicals (su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re this Court under Section 260A of the Act against the original order dated 22 April 2008. We find that the Tribunal has correctly observed that there was no mistake apparent in the order dated 22 April 2008 passed by the Tribunal warranting entertaining the miscellaneous application for rectification. 7) In view of the above, we find no merit in the above petitions. Accordingly, the petitions a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
