Case Law Details

Case Name : Sir Dorabji Tata Trust Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 3909/Mum/2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 30/12/2020
Related Assessment Year : 2014-15

Sir Dorabji Tata Trust Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

IT held that At page 60-61 of its order dated 28th December, 2020, certain observations were made about Mr Cyrus Mistry. One fact, which was inadvertently missed out, was that the information furnished by Mr Mistry was in response to a notice. Under these circumstances, the observations made in para-38, which is now renumbered on account of typographical mistake as para-48, is modifies.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT

1. As some inadvertent errors have crept in the order dated 28th December, 2020 passed by us, disposing of this appeal, we deem it fit and proper to rectify as under :-

1. At page 60, paragraph 47 is, on account of a typographical error, numbered as paragraph 37.

Accordingly, “37” in the beginning of this paragraph stands substituted by “47”;

and, all remaining paragraphs are renumbered as 48 to 67, instead of 38 to 57.

2. At page 60-61, certain observations were made about Mr Cyrus Mistry. One fact, which was inadvertently missed out, was that the information furnished by Mr Mistry was in response to a notice. Under these circumstances, the observations made in para-38, which is now renumbered on account of typographical mistake as para-48, is modified by substituting as under:-

“48. It is well known that Cyrus Mistry, a former Chairman of the Tata Group, was removed from his position in the Tata Group on 24th October 2016, and within eight weeks of his removal, he sends this material in response to notice, against the trusts in the Tata group – including the assessee before us, to the Assessing Officer. The inputs from those engaged in a rivalry with an assessee ought to have been considered by the department with a reasonable degree of circumspection and should not be placed on such a high pedestal so as to relegate all other material facts and accepted past assessment history of the case into insignificance.”

2. The above mistakes stand rectified accordingly, and, to that extent, the order dated 28th December, 2020 stands modified. The above corrections will have no impact on the outcome of the appeal. The outcome of the appeal thus, remains the same.

Download Judgment/Order

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Join Taxguru Group on Whatsapp

taxguru on whatsapp WHATSAPP GROUP LINK

Join Taxguru Group on Whatsapp

taxguru on whatsapp WHATSAPP GROUP LINK

Join Taxguru Group on Whatsapp

taxguru on whatsapp WHATSAPP GROUP LINK

Join Taxguru Group on Whatsapp

taxguru on whatsapp WHATSAPP GROUP LINK

Join Taxguru Group on Whatsapp

taxguru on whatsapp WHATSAPP GROUP LINK

Join Taxguru Group on Whatsapp

taxguru on whatsapp WHATSAPP GROUP LINK

Join Taxguru Group on Whatsapp

taxguru on whatsapp WHATSAPP GROUP LINK

Join Taxguru Group on Whatsapp

taxguru on whatsapp WHATSAPP GROUP LINK

Join Taxguru Group on Whatsapp

taxguru on whatsapp WHATSAPP GROUP LINK

Join Taxguru Group on Whatsapp

taxguru on whatsapp WHATSAPP GROUP LINK

Join Taxguru Group on Telegram

taxguru on telegram TELEGRAM GROUP LINK

More Under Income Tax

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Posts by Date

November 2021
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930