← All Phrases

“Section 154(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 154Section 154(1)44 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 154(1) is Fatehraj Singhvi v. UOI (73 Taxmann.com 252), cited in 1,778 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 154(1)

Fatehraj Singhvi v. UOI
73 Taxmann.com 252 · 2016 · High Court
1,778
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E are not applicable for periods prior to June 1, 2015, as the amendment to section 200A inserting clause (c) was effective from that date.

Kourani v. Union OF India
83 Taxmann.com 137 · 2017 · High Court
1,708
citing judgments

The fee under Section 234E for late filing of TDS/TCS statements cannot be levied retrospectively by processing an intimation under Section 200A for defaults occurring before the amendment allowing such processing.

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.
321 ITR 508 · 2010 · High Court
1,629
citing judgments

Employee contributions to PF and ESIC, deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but within the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), are allowable deductions under Section 36(1)(va). Such disallowance cannot be made during processing under Section 143(1).

Fateh Raj Singhvi & Ors. v. UOI
289 CTR 602 · 2016 · High Court
844
citing judgments

A fee under Section 234E cannot be levied or adjusted in an intimation under Section 200A for TDS statements pertaining to periods prior to June 1, 2015, as the enabling amendment to Section 200A(1)(c) came into effect only from that date.

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
82 Taxmann.com 415 · 2017 · High Court
789
citing judgments

Disallowance computed under Section 14A, read with Rule 8D, cannot be added to book profits under Section 115JB for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes. Additionally, for Section 14A disallowance, only investments that yielded exempt income during the year are considered for calculating their average value.

Rashmikant Kundalia v. Union of India
54 Taxmann.com 200 · 2015 · High Court
702
citing judgments

Section 234E, levying late fees for delayed filing of TDS statements under section 200(3), is constitutionally valid and constitutes a compensatory fee, not a punitive penalty. Before treating any person as an assessee-in-default, an opportunity of being heard must be provided.

Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT
394 ITR 449 · 2017 · Supreme Court
683
citing judgments

Expenditure can only be disallowed under Section 14A if the income is exempt and not part of the total income. The Assessing Officer must first record dissatisfaction with the assessee's accounts or computation before proceeding to make a disallowance under Section 14A or applying Rule 8D.

Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. UOI
440 ITR 26 · 2022 · High Court
614
citing judgments

The fee under Section 234E of the Income-tax Act cannot be levied for defaults in filing TDS statements committed prior to June 1, 2015, as the provision for its levy became effective only from that date.

Judgments citing Section 154(1)

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Nagpur vs. The Wardha District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd, Wardha

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 222/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Ms. Alfiya RozieFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 116Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(1)Section 154(7)Section 186Section 250

order under section 154 after expiry of limitation period of four years. 7.4 Provisions of section 154) speak about rectification of mistake. Section 154(1) of the Act says that with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record an income tax authority referred to in section

Hariom Biotech Agri Farming, Nagpur vs. DCIT CPC Bengaluru, CPC Bengaluru Karnataka

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 300/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154(1)(b)Section 2

face of the ITR filed by the assessee and this being a mistake apparent from record, it can be rectified under section 154(1)(b), which provides for amendment of any intimation, or deemed intimation under section 143(1) in case of mistake apparent from record. However, the could

Lade Madwesh, Kadapa vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-(2), Kadapa

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 546/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.546/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Lade Madwesh Vs. Income Tax Officer Kadapa Ward-2 Pan:Aabhl5201M Kadapa (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Kumar Pal Tated, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Rahul Singhania, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 22/05/2024

For Appellant: Shri Kumar Pal Tated, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Rahul Singhania, DR
Section 116Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154(1)Section 200ASection 206C

subject to rectification u/s 154 of the Act or not. To decide the issue, it is relevant to reproduce Section 154(1) of the Act, which is to the following effect: “Rectification of mistake. 154. (1) With a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record an income

Anurag Singh, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1199/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Kanika Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh

Canara Bank, Large Corporate Branch, Mumbai vs. ACIT CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3627/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 194ASection 197Section 200ASection 201

under sub section of 200A with a view to rectify any mistake apparent from the record in accordance with the provisions of section 154(1). Moreover, as per section 154(2)(a) of the Act the AO can make such amendment on its own. Further, these mistakes are very much

Wholery Infrastructure Private Limited, Kota, Rajasthan vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kota, Rajasthan

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 525/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 139(9)Section 154Section 154(1)(a)Section 44A

Appellant u/s 154 of the Act was for rectification the order passed u/s 139(9) of the Act and as per provision of section 154(1)(a) of the Act the mistake apparent in such order is duly rectifiable. 1.2 The Id CIT(A) erred in holding that application filed ... well apparent from the record and duly curable u/s 154 of the Act. For the sake of ready reference, the provisions of section 154(1) is reproduced as under: - [(1) With a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record an income-tax authority referred to in section

Shri Gopal Soni, Bikaner vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Bikaner

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 383/JODH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur11 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteshri Gopal Soni Prop Vs. The Acit, Circle – 1 Durga Silver Home Bikaner. Katla Chowk Nokha Rajasthan. Bikaner-334803, Rajasthan. Pan/Gir No. : Aemps5097M Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Nair, Jcit -Dr Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Bikaner Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Nair, JCIT -DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(1)Section 154Section 234CSection 69

possible views or whether the previous view of the Assessing Officer was a view which was not possible but was only a mistake. Section 154(1) of the Income-tax Act permits rectification of any mistake apparent from the record, by an Income Tax Authority, of any order passed

Enviro Technology Limited, Ankleshwar vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 28/SRT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.28/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Virtual Hearing) Enviro Technology Limited, Vs. The Dcit, Plot No. 2413/14, Gidc Estate, Centralized Processing Centre, Ankleshwar – 393002, Gujarat. Banglore. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace4126G Appellant By Ms Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 24/04/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 16/06/2023

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 154Section 154(1)

available with the assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Assessing Officer has not rectified the apparent mistake under section 154(1) of the Act and did not include the surcharge and education cess in MAT credit. The Ld. Counsel also relied on the judgment of Co-ordinate

DCIT Circle 8(2) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. . Ogilvy and Mather Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the In the result, the cross appeals of the assessee and Revenue of the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1638/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ajit Shah/Hetal Sangani
Section 37

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI NARENDER

DCIT, Cir 8(2) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Ogilvy and Mather Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the In the result, the cross appeals of the assessee and Revenue of the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1637/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ajit Shah/Hetal Sangani
Section 37

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI NARENDER

Ogilvy and Mather P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Asstt. CIT-8(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the In the result, the cross appeals of the assessee and Revenue of the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1326/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ajit Shah/Hetal Sangani
Section 37

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI NARENDER

Ogily and Mather P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Asst. CIT -8(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the In the result, the cross appeals of the assessee and Revenue of the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1325/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ajit Shah/Hetal Sangani
Section 37

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI NARENDER

Ogilvy and Mather P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Asst. CIT-8(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the In the result, the cross appeals of the assessee and Revenue of the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1324/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ajit Shah/Hetal Sangani
Section 37

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI NARENDER

M/S. Grid Corporation of Orissa Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT-(TDS), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 323/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2009-2010 2010 Grid Corporation Of Orissa Grid Corporation Of Orissa Vs. Acit (Tds), Acit (Tds), Ltd., Ltd., Gridco Gridco House, House, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabcg 5398 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain/P.Venugopal Rao /P.Venugopal Rao, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/0 /02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, 1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 12.7.2019 In Appeal No. In Appeal No.0035/17-18 For The Assessment Year The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, Ld Ar Ld Ars Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: S/Shri Ved Jain/P.Venugopal RaoFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 154Section 244ASection 244A(2)

Officer, to the expenditure incurred to get the rice husked, did not constitute a mistake, apparent from the record within the meaning of section 154(1), was thus not justified. The Hon'ble Delhi ITAT in the case of Shiv Shakti Traders vs. ACIT (139 tilonann.com 193) held that where

Sree Gokulam Chit and Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. Dy. Commissioner Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 765/CHNY/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Dec 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri N Arjunraj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 1Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

South Industrial Corporation Ltd., (2002) 258 ITR 481, wherein it is held as “When a statutory provisions is record. The rectification under section 154(1) on the ground that the order sought to be rectified is not in conformity with the law declared by the apex court is required

Kumar Spinning Mills Privae Ltd., Tirunelveli vs. ACIT, TDS, CPC, Gaziabad

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 697/CHNY/2022[2015-16(24Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 154Section 154(1)Section 154(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

first time in order u/s.154 of the Act, the same is to be deleted as it falls outside the scope of Section 154(1) of the Act and runs contrary to Section 154(3) of the Act.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessee had filed

Kumar Spinning Mills Privae Ltd., Tirunelveli vs. ACIT, TDS, CPC, Gaziabad

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 696/CHNY/2022[2015-16(24Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 154Section 154(1)Section 154(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

first time in order u/s.154 of the Act, the same is to be deleted as it falls outside the scope of Section 154(1) of the Act and runs contrary to Section 154(3) of the Act.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessee had filed

Kumar Spinning Mills Privae Ltd., Tirunelveli vs. ACIT, TDS, CPC, Gaziabad

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 695/CHNY/2022[2015-16(24Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 154Section 154(1)Section 154(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

first time in order u/s.154 of the Act, the same is to be deleted as it falls outside the scope of Section 154(1) of the Act and runs contrary to Section 154(3) of the Act.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessee had filed

Kumar Spinning Mills Privae Ltd., Tirunelveli vs. ACIT, TDS, CPC, Gaziabad

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 694/CHNY/2022[2015-16(24Q-Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 154Section 154(1)Section 154(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

first time in order u/s.154 of the Act, the same is to be deleted as it falls outside the scope of Section 154(1) of the Act and runs contrary to Section 154(3) of the Act.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessee had filed

Kumar Spinning Mills Privae Ltd., Tirunelveli vs. ACIT, TDS, CPC, Gaziabad

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 693/CHNY/2022[2014-15-26Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 154Section 154(1)Section 154(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

first time in order u/s.154 of the Act, the same is to be deleted as it falls outside the scope of Section 154(1) of the Act and runs contrary to Section 154(3) of the Act.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessee had filed