section 254

Prosecution – made more simpler for revenue

Income Tax - A perusal of this order reveals that the Tribunal has recorded a finding that it is empowered by Section 254 of the Act to stay prosecution. The said finding is the bone of contention between the parties. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench (Punjab & Haryana HIgh Court at Chandigarh),...

Read More

Provide Shorter Time For Rectification Of Mistake by Tribunal

Income Tax - The existing provisions of Section 254(2) provide for a time-limit of four years from the date of the order of the Appellate Tribunal for rectification of mistakes apparent from the record. In practice this long time-limit has given rise to difficulties arising on account of non-availability of the Members who passed the order due to tran...

Read More

There can be no tax liability without the authority of law : ITAT Mumbai

Nivea India Private Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) - This appeal by assessee u/s 253 of Income Tax Act (the Act) is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-15, Mumbai dated 16.10.2012 for Assessment Year 2007-08. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal...

Read More

Tribunal cannot condone delay in filing Miscellaneous Application

DCIT Vs Hita Land Private Limited (ITAT Mumbai) - The Tribunal has been given power to admit an appeal after the expiry of the relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period as per Section 253(5). However, this Tribunal is not enshrined with such powers in respect of a miscellaneous peti...

Read More

ITAT clarifies period of limitation for filing rectification application U/s. 254(2)

Srinivas Sashidhar Chaganty Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) - Section 254(2) of the Act refers to the period of limitation reckoning from the end of the month in which the order is passed and not from the date of ‘date of receipt of the served/ received are not interchangeable and the Legislature in its wisdom expressly used the phraselogy depending on the i...

Read More

Section 254(2) cannot be applied to seek review of ITAT order

Ganjikunta Kishore Babu (HUF) Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) - By section 254(4) of the IT Act, an order which has been passed by the Tribunal reaches finality the moment the same is passed: it cannot be touched thereafter. By section 254(2) of the act, the Tribunal, however, has been authorized to rectify mistakes in its orders, which are apparent on the face ...

Read More

Tribunal recalled order having mistake apparent from record

Reliance Communications Ltd vs. DDIT (ITAT Mumbai) - These bunch of miscellaneous applications have been filed by different assessees viz., Reliance Communications Ltd., (formerly known as Reliance Infocom Ltd.), Reliance Communications Infrastructure Ltd., Reliance BPO Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Reliance Infostream Pvt. Ltd.) and Reliance Telecom L...

Read More
Sorry No Post Found

Recent Posts in "section 254"

There can be no tax liability without the authority of law : ITAT Mumbai

Nivea India Private Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

This appeal by assessee u/s 253 of Income Tax Act (the Act) is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-15, Mumbai dated 16.10.2012 for Assessment Year 2007-08. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal...

Read More

Tribunal cannot condone delay in filing Miscellaneous Application

DCIT Vs Hita Land Private Limited (ITAT Mumbai)

The Tribunal has been given power to admit an appeal after the expiry of the relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period as per Section 253(5). However, this Tribunal is not enshrined with such powers in respect of a miscellaneous petition filed u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax ...

Read More

ITAT clarifies period of limitation for filing rectification application U/s. 254(2)

Srinivas Sashidhar Chaganty Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)

Section 254(2) of the Act refers to the period of limitation reckoning from the end of the month in which the order is passed and not from the date of ‘date of receipt of the served/ received are not interchangeable and the Legislature in its wisdom expressly used the phraselogy depending on the intention. In the instant case, the expre...

Read More

Section 254(2) cannot be applied to seek review of ITAT order

Ganjikunta Kishore Babu (HUF) Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)

By section 254(4) of the IT Act, an order which has been passed by the Tribunal reaches finality the moment the same is passed: it cannot be touched thereafter. By section 254(2) of the act, the Tribunal, however, has been authorized to rectify mistakes in its orders, which are apparent on the face of the records. ...

Read More

Tribunal recalled order having mistake apparent from record

Reliance Communications Ltd vs. DDIT (ITAT Mumbai)

These bunch of miscellaneous applications have been filed by different assessees viz., Reliance Communications Ltd., (formerly known as Reliance Infocom Ltd.), Reliance Communications Infrastructure Ltd., Reliance BPO Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Reliance Infostream Pvt. Ltd.) and Reliance Telecom Ltd....

Read More

Assessee cannot seek restoration of Appeal withdrawn on advise of her Advocate without submitting Advocates letter

Jayant D. Sanghavi Vs ITAT (Bombay High Court)

In the present facts there is nothing on record in the form of the Advocates letter, etc. to indicate that the petitioner acted upon his legal advise and the same was wrong. Therefore, whether the petitioner acted on advise of his Advocate or not is itself a subject matter of debate. Thus taking the application outside the scope of Sectio...

Read More

Provide Shorter Time For Rectification Of Mistake by Tribunal

The existing provisions of Section 254(2) provide for a time-limit of four years from the date of the order of the Appellate Tribunal for rectification of mistakes apparent from the record. In practice this long time-limit has given rise to difficulties arising on account of non-availability of the Members who passed the order due to tran...

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax |

No review power vest with ITAT, only authorized to amend his order for mistake apparent from records u/s 254 (2)

Shakti Cable Industries Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

ITAT Mumbai held In the case of Shakti Cable Industries vs. ITO that it is clear that the words mistake apparent from record, as appearing in the section 254(2) has a special meaning and definite connotation....

Read More

Prosecution – made more simpler for revenue

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench (Punjab & Haryana HIgh Court at Chandigarh)

A perusal of this order reveals that the Tribunal has recorded a finding that it is empowered by Section 254 of the Act to stay prosecution. The said finding is the bone of contention between the parties. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench (Punjab & Haryana HIgh Court at Chandigarh),...

Read More

Review u/s 254(2) only if there is a mistake apparent from the record

M/s. Janus Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

If the AO had reopened the assessment and made a disallowance and these facts could affect the outcome of the issue, the AO should appear before the FAA to file an explanation about the chronology of events. But, in any manner the subsequent decision taken by the AO cannot be held to be a mistake apparent from the record....

Read More
Page 1 of 212

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,480)
Company Law (3,398)
Custom Duty (6,601)
DGFT (3,446)
Excise Duty (4,043)
Fema / RBI (3,249)
Finance (3,453)
Income Tax (25,012)
SEBI (2,733)
Service Tax (3,280)

Search Posts by Date

September 2017
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930