SADISH PAUL,PONDICHERRY vs. DCIT, WARD-1, PUDUCHERRY
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal, holding that the addition was made under Section 143(1), which is an independently appealable order, and the assessee should have contested it directly. It affirmed that Section 154 applies only to rectifying arithmetical or typographical errors, and since no such error was found, the CIT(A)'s decision was correct.
What were the facts?
The assessee's income was adjusted by the AO by Rs. 12 lakhs under Section 143(1), treating remuneration as salary based on 26AS data. The assessee filed a rectification application under Section 154, which the AO rejected, and the CIT(A) upheld this rejection.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) correctly upheld the rejection of the assessee's rectification application under Section 154, given that the original addition was made under Section 143(1) and deemed appealable independently.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(1),Section 143(1)(vi),Section 154,Section 246,Section 246(1)(a),Section 143(3),Section 144,Section 143(1B)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA
PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2023-24 / 1053693294(1) dated 13.06.2023 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. . The reference to the word “Act” in this order hereinafter shall mean the Income Tax Act, 1961 as amended from tim
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 154
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Rakesh Kumar Malani, JaipurITA 1425/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Anita Sharma, JaipurITA 1344/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Ramtirath Bawa, Nagpur vs ITO Ward3(4), NagpurITA 327/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Mohinder Singh, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 3(4), NagpurITA 322/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026