Income Tax : The Income-tax Act has prescribed time limit in respect of various procedures, applications, etc. (like time limit for filing an a...
Income Tax : Article discusses about Order which can be rectified under section 154 of Income Tax Act, 1961, Rectification of Income Tax order ...
Income Tax : Proposed reforms in tax procedures: shorten rectification processing time, allow partial payment for appeals, and streamline colle...
Income Tax : If any mistake is apparent from the record, the Income-tax authority can rectify such mistake. An order of rectification is requ...
Income Tax : Apeksha Gupta Sometimes there may be a mistake in any order passed by the Assessing Officer. In such a situation, mistake which is...
Income Tax : KSCAA has made a Representation on Challenges in Income Tax Related to Rectification Proceedings, Order Giving Effect, Delay in P...
Income Tax : Even after due efforts taken by the Government to ensure compliance relating to filing of TDS returns by the deductors, the defaul...
Income Tax : Taxpayers who are not satisfied with the outcome of processing of their Income Tax Return by the Centralized Processing Centre, Be...
Income Tax : Department introduces new facility for online submission of rectification request in cases where processing was completed by CPC B...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court quashes Income Tax reassessment notice against Deepak Natvarlal Pankhiyani HUF, citing lack of fresh evidence s...
Income Tax : PCIT Vs Farmson Pharmaceuticals Gujarat Pvt Ltd (Gujarat High Court): Reassessment cannot be solely based on a reevaluation of exi...
Income Tax : ITAT Indore rules in Asha Rani Pandya Vs DCIT/ACIT that filing Form 67 for claiming Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) is a directory requir...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi rules Section 56(2)(vii) inapplicable to non-residents, deleting Rs. 9.31 Cr addition for APL Logistics Vascor Automoti...
Income Tax : Explore the ITAT Mumbai's decision on payments to retiring partners by Deloitte Haskins and Sells LLP. Understand why it's not con...
Income Tax : Taxpayers who are not satisfied with the outcome of processing of their Income Tax Return by the Centralized Processing Centre, Be...
Income Tax : Instruction No. 02/2016 Section 154 of the Act mandates that rectification order shall be passed in writing by the Income Tax auth...
Income Tax : Instruction No. 01/2016 section 154 stipulates that where application for amendment is made by assessee/deductor/collector with a...
Income Tax : 225/148/2015-ITA-II Expeditious disposal of applications for rectification under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) dur...
Income Tax : INSTRUCTION NO. 3/2013 Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide Judgment in case of Court On its Own Motion v. UOI and Ors. in W.P. (C) 2659/...
Mistake apparent on the record u/s 154 must be an obvious and patent mistake and not something which can be established by a long drawn process of reasoning on points on which there may be conceivably two opinions.
Tribunal in this above case decided two debatable issues. Firstly that the mistake can be rectified after assessment attained finality and assessee had accepted the assessment order. The same is decided by the tribunal in the light of decision of apex court.
Karnataka High Court held In the case of K.S. Venkatesh vs. DCIT that The Hon’ble Apex Court in T.S.Balaram Vs Volkart Brothers and others reported in 1971 (82) ITR 50 has observed that a mistake apparent on the record must be obvious and patent mistake and not something
Income Tax law provides an exhaustive, encyclopedic and compendious machinery to deal with the issues of what can be conceived and what can be believed with regard to the jurisprudence of taxing the subject as a whole. In this profitable and solvent venture of taxing the subject through the route of his due filings with the respective authorities and agencies designated and deputed by the government
225/148/2015-ITA-II Expeditious disposal of applications for rectification under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) during the Financial Year 2015-16 – reg.- Union Finance Minister in his key-note address has also exhorted the Income-tax Department to be prompt in redressing the grievances of taxpayers. It has been a matter of concern that the rectification applications as 154 filed by the taxpayers before the field officers are not being dealt with promptly.
In the case of Cardinal Drugs Pvt Ltd.Hon’ble ITAT has observed that there was no scope for the A.O. to have resorted to the provision of Section 154 of the Act for the purpose of enhancing the income of the assessee.by stating as under:- The A.O. on long drawn process of reasoning should not have passed the order under Section154 of the Act. The issue raised by the A.O. in proceeding under Section 154 of the Act is highly debatable which requires the issue to be reconsidered by the A.O.about applicability of the provision of Section 115JB of the Act which was notraised by the A.O. in assessment or appellate proceedings.
Facts of the case show that the assessee filed return of income declaring net income of Rs. 24,14,640/- electronically on 21.10.2007. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the I.T. Act. The assessee noticed that credit for advance tax of Rs. 1,10,000/- and TDS of Rs. 5,38,560/- was not allowed to the assessee.
INSTRUCTION NO. 3/2013 Hon’ble Delhi High Court vide Judgment in case of Court On its Own Motion v. UOI and Ors. in W.P. (C) 2659/2012 dated 14.03.2013 has issued several Mandamuses for necessary action by income-tax Department one of which is regarding maintenance of “Rectification Register” in which details like receipt of applications under section 154 of the IT Act, their processing and disposal are to be maintained. (Reference: Para 16 to 18 of the order).
In the present case, the Ld. AO made changes in the original order by invoking sec 154 based on evidences and disallowed a certain sum of expenditure which were related to previous years and as told found to be of capital in nature too. On appeal to CIT by the assessee, an order was passed for providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
It is settled position of law that where any issue is debatable, it cannot be corrected u/s 154 of the Act. In this regard, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of T.S. Balaram ITO v. Volkart Bros. [1971] 82 ITR 50 is relevant wherein an action taken by Assessing Officer u/s 154 of the Act was found to be illegal.
