B.V.K. Seshavataram v. CIT

210 ITR 633High Court1994#19863 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,254 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 154Section 80IC

Judgments citing B.V.K. Seshavataram v. CIT

Om Infra Limited, Jaipur Rajasthan vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur, Rajasthan

In the result, we find no substantial question of law being involved in this appeal

ITA 811/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 80Section 801C(2)(b)Section 80I

…rent from record and is rectifiable under section 154 of the Act. This is settled law on Section 154. Even subsequent interpretation of the law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court would constitute "mistake apparent from records". • B.V.K. Seshavataram Vs. CIT (1994) 210 ITR 633 (AP)) • ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (2008) 305 ITR 227 (SC) • Circular: No. 68 [F.No.245/17/71-A & PAC), dated 17-11-1971 6.8 In view of the above, the action of the Id. assessing officer in the rectification order is upheld and the ground no. 3 of the appeal of the appellant is dismissed.” 8 Om Infra Limited vs. DCIT, Central…

Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv, Ahmedabad vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 315/AHD/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2005-06 Vs. Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv, The Income-Tax Officer, A-9, Kumud Apartment, Ward-5(2)(2), Near Stadium Five Roads, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Aaaab 3885 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sakar Sharma, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vipul Chavda, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 20.06.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2005-06. 2. Grounds Raised Are As Under :- “1. The Ld. Cit(A)-Nfac Erred On Facts & In Law In Deciding Appeal Ex- Parte Without Appreciating That Business Of The Appellant Has Been Closed Since Covid-19 & Therefore, In Absence Of Any Office, Notice(S) Claimed To Be Have Been Served Through Email Could Not Be Communicated To The Partners Of The Appellant. Without Prejudice To This It Is Submitted That No Notice(S) Came To Be Served On The Appellant At The Designated Email Stated In Form No. 35 For The Purpose Of Service Of Notice(S). Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv Vs. Ito Ay : 2005-06 2

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Chavda, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 234DSection 250Section 250(6)Section 40

…may either be pending or received after the issue of this circular. 2. The Board desire that any appeals or references pending on the point at issue may please be withdrawn.” Reliance was also placed on the following decision • B.V.K. Seshavataram Vs. CIT, 210 ITR 633 (AP) “Section 256(1) , read with section 32(1)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Reference to High Court - Question of law - Assessment years 1981-82, 1982-83 and 1984-85 to 1987-88 - Whether a subsequent decision of Supreme Court can validly form basis for rectifying an order of assessment under section 154 - Held, yes” (c) Our attention was a…

M/S. Shivamm Industries, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Dismissed

ITA 393/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.393/Pun/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S.Shivamm Industries, The Dy.Commissioner Of Plot 76, Arihant Heights, Sector Vs Income Tax, Circle-8, No.25, Pradhikaran Nigdi, Pune. Pune – 411044. Pan: Aaefs 0458 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 15/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26/05/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee I.E. Shivamm Industries For A.Y. 2013-14 Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Of Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Dated 21.03.2023 Emanating From Assessing Officer’S Order Under Section 154 Of The Act Dated 22.03.2021. The Ground Of Appeal Are As Under : “1. The Order Dated 21/03/2023 Bearing No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1051048828[L] Passed Under Section 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 By The Hon’Ble Cit[Appeals], National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Is Excessive, M/S.Shivamm Industries [A]

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36

…t directed the AO to do rectification. This order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13 M/s.Shivamm Industries [A] 11.2 Similarly, the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of B.V.K. Seshavataram Vs CIT [1994] 210 ITR 633 (Andhra Pradesh) has held as under : Quote “ Although the opening words of section 154(1) with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, an income-tax authority. . ." subsequently, not being part of the record at the time when the assessment was finalised, could not be the basis for rectification of any mistake under section 154,…

ITO, Tuticorin vs. Sterlite Industries (India) Limited, Tuticorin

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands allowed

ITA 1043/CHNY/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. S. Renga rajan, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. G. Baskar, Advocate
Section 10(15)(iv)Section 143Section 147Section 154Section 195Section 2Section 201

…and the period of limitation prescribed in section 153 for completion of assessment does not apply to the liability u/s.195 or section 201 of the Income-tax Act, 1961." 7.The learned CIT(A) ought to have noticed the case of B.V.K. Seshavataram vs CIT (1994) 210 ITR 633 (A), has held that subsequent decision of the Supreme Court can form basis of order of rectification. In the case of CED vs. V.G.Badmia (1990) 186 ITR 170 (Bombay) the Tribunal was held to be justified in rectifying the order so as to bring it in conformity with the Supreme Court decision". Both the decisions are squarely not applicable to the fa…

B.V.K. Seshavataram v. CIT (210 ITR 633) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax