IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Mahavir Singh (JM) & Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) M.A. No. 291/Mum/2016 arising out of R.A. No. 2519/Mum/1992 in I.T.A. No.3990/Mum/1988 (Assessment Year 1984-85) Infomedia Press Limited CIT Bombay City-I (earlier know as Tata Press Vs. Mumbai. Ltd) 414, Veer Savarkar Marg Prabhadevi Mumbai-400 025. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No.AAACT0190R Assessee by Shri Nishant Thakkar Department by Shri H.M. Wanare Date of Hearing 23.9.2016 Date of Pronouncement 23.9.2016 ORDER Per B.R. Baskaran (AM) :- assessee has filed this miscellaneous application seeking rectification of mistakes apparent from record in Statement of case referred by Tribunal to Hon ble High Court of Bombay, vide its order dated 26-10-1993. 2. Ld A.R submitted that question that was referred to Hon ble High Court by Tribunal was related to granting of interest u/s 214 of Act after amendment made by insertion of sub-section (1A) in section 214. Ld A.R submitted that amendment was brought in by Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984, but it was inadvertently mentioned as Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act 1987 in order passed by Tribunal. Ld A.R took us to sec. 2 Infomedia Press Ltd. 214 of Act and amendments made therein and accordingly prayed that above said mistake may be rectified. 3. We heard Ld D.R and perused record. We notice that amendment in sec. 214 of Act has been brought by Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act 1984 only and hence mistake pointed out by assessee needs to be rectified. Accordingly words Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987 , where ever it occurs shall be replaced by words Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984. 4. Accordingly paragraph 4 of order would stand modified as under:- 4. On facts and circumstances of case, we consider only following questions require to be referred which would cover all issues raised in questions, namely- 1. Whether, on facts and in circumstances of case Tribunal was justified in upholding order passed by C.I.T under section 263? 2. Whether amendment made by insertion of sub-section (1A) in section 214 by Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984 providing for grant of interest is clarificatory and in any event applicable to facts of present case? 5. assessee has also sought rectification of order by substituting new name of assessee in order, i.e., order passed by Tribunal in name of Tata Press Limited , which has since been changed into Infomedia Press Limited . Ld A.R furnished copies of Certificate of Incorporation to show change of name. We notice that name of company has been changed several times subsequent to passing of order by Tribunal and we notice that order has been passed in name, in which petition was filed. Hence, in our considered view, prayer of assessee may 3 Infomedia Press Ltd. not constitute mistake apparent from record warranting rectification of order. Accordingly we reject this plea of assessee. 6. In result, miscellaneous application filed by assessee is partly allowed. Order has been pronounced in Court on 23.9.2016 Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated : 23/9/2016 Copy of Order forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard File. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) PS ITAT, Mumbai Infomedia Press Limited (earlier know as Tata Press Ltd.) v. CIT, Mumbai