“Section 154(8)”

Section References (mined)Section 154Section 154(8)20 judgments

RAJENDRA KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA, DURG,DURG vs. ITO, NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 744/RPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.744/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21 Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava, Mig-42, Padmanabhpur, Durg (C.G.)-491 001 Pan: Alops3921M

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 154Section 154(2)(B)Section 154(8)Section 155Section 186Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

expiry of four years 86[ from the end of the financial year in which the order87 sought to be amended was passed.] SECTION 154(8)-88[(8) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (7), where an application for amendment under this section is made by the assessee

SONMARG CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19 3 1, PIRAMAL CHAMBER MUMBAI

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

ITA 5627/MUM/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154(3)Section 154(8)Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

acknowledgment of Rectification Application dated 12/11/2013. I say that the said Application dated 12/11/2013 is pending in spite of specific provision of section 154(8) of the Act. I say that the assessee approached the AO and brought to the notice of the AO that deduction ... filing appeals. I say that the assessee was under the bonafide belief that in view of specific provision of section 143(1) and section 154(8), the AO will modify the order dated 12/07/2013 on his own in 5 Sonmarg co-operative House Society Ltd, Mumbai. response to Rectification Application

SARJOO PRASAD RAJPAT,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1)(4), KANPUR

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

ITA 343/LKW/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Subhash Malguria & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2009-10 M/S Sarjoo Prasad Rajpat Vs. Ito-1(1)(4), 55/15, Kahoo Kothi, Kanpur 16/69/ Kanpur Pan:Aaffs5661Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Pradeep Kumar Sahgal, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. Deepak Yadav, Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.07.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 13.03.2024 Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Under Section 154 Passed By The Ld. Ao On 25.04.2018. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Order In Appeal Passed By The Ld Cit(A), Nfac Is Bad In Law & Facts & Deserves To Be Quashed By Allowing The Appeal. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Has Erred In Law & In Facts, In Upholding The Order Of Ld. Ao In Rejecting The Application Made Under Section 154 Of The Act. 3. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Of The Appellant, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Rejecting Contention Of Appellant For Rectification Of Mistake U/S 154 Of The Act On The Ground That Appellant Ought To Have Filed Revised Return Of Income Within Due Date If There Was Any Mistake In Filing Of Original Return Of Income. The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Ought To Have Appreciated That Ao Is Bound To Compute Correct Income As Per Provisions Of The Act & Tax Cannot Be Levied At Higher Amount Due To Error Made While Filing Return Of Income.

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Kumar Sahgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Deepak Yadav, DR

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154(8)Section 250

barred by limitation as return had been processed on 31.12.2010 by the CPC and therefore, the application received on 3.10.2017 was rejected under section 154(8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The assessee went in appeal against this decision to the ld. CIT(A). Before ... determine whether the assessee was entitled for making rectification application at the time in view of the provisions of section 154(8) and thereafter he may decide the issue in accordance with law. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced

SUBHASH CHAND,KARNAL vs. ITO WARD - 4, KARNAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 655/DEL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 154(7)Section 80

issue which has been reopened, there was no rectification proceeding pending. The ld. DR has submitted that under the provisions of section 154(8) of the Act, the order u/s 154 of the Act was to be passed upto 31.07.2017 if the notice dated 12.01.2017 is considered to have been ... part of the Revenue to initiate the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act. 8. As far as application of provisions of section 154(8) of the Act is concerned, the same is applicable where the application is moved by an assessee which is not the case. Thus, the assertions

TEJENDER PAL SINGH SAHNI,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result ITA No. 1147/JP/2024 (A

ITA 1152/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69Section 80C

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nJAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, JAIPUR\nBEFORE Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND\nSHRI

TEJENDER PAL SINGH SAHNI,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result ITA No. 1147/JP/2024 (A

ITA 1147/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. C. M. Birla, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT, Ld. DR

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69Section 80C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, JAIPUR BEFORE Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

GEETA SHARMA,SUNAM vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , PATIALA

ITA 476/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saldi, CAFor Respondent: ShriRohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 253Section 263Section 44ASection 80T

under Section 154 rectifying the defects pointed out by ld. AR of the assessee. We hold that by virtue of provision contained in section 154(8) it is incumbent upon the Income Tax Authorities to pass an order within a period of six months from the end of the month

ARUMUGANADAR NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORP CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 806/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Section 143(2)Section 154Section 154(8)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)

ought to have seen that the Rectification Petition\nU/s.154 filed by the Appellant on 07.01.2019, must be deemed to\nbe allowed as per section 154(8) after 6 months from the date of\nfiling and directed the AO accordingly.\n5. Any other ground that may be raised at the time

ANURADHA KUMARI,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to cost

ITA 469/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Rohan SoganiFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 154Section 154(8)Section 234A

erred in holding that rejection of rectification application u/s 154 was valid even if passed beyond 06 months contrary to the provisions of Section 154(8) of the Act. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please

INDACO JEANS PRIVATE LIMITED,GOREGOAN EAST vs. WARD 6(3)(2), AAYAKRBHAVAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee vide

ITA 80/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Ashwin ChhagFor Respondent: H.M. Bhatt

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

P a g e | 1 ITA Nos.79 & 80/Mum/2024 Indaco Jeans Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO-6(3)(2) IN THE INCOME

INDACO JEANS PRIVATE LIMITED,GOREGAON EAST vs. I.T.O 6(3)(2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee vide

ITA 79/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Ashwin ChhagFor Respondent: H.M. Bhatt

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

P a g e | 1 ITA Nos.79 & 80/Mum/2024 Indaco Jeans Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO-6(3)(2) IN THE INCOME

JAN SHIKSHAN SANSATHAN,MOHALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 801/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off. 4. That The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Is Erroneous, Arbitrary, Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case & Is, Thus, Untenable.”

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manpreet Duggal, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 154Section 245

days of receiving the intimation u/s 143(1), the assessee has moved the rectification application u/s 154(2) and in terms of section 154(8), it was incumbent on part of the CPC to pass an order within six months of receipt of the rectification application and given that

S K SHARMA CONTRACTOR,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(2)(3), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed as above

ITA 798/DEL/2023[1991-92]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 1991-92

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(8)Section 220(2)Section 244A

interest thereon under section 244A of the Act, which was not disposed of within the statutory time period of 6 months as per section 154(8) of the Act. In such circumstances, the appellant/assessee had not any option except to file grievance petitions and CPGRAM before the Income Tax Authorities ... accordance with the law and in pursuance of the Ld. CIT(A)’s order dated 04.01.2013. 9. Section 154(8) of the Act provides that any application filed under section 154 of the Act shall be disposed of within the six months from the end of the month in which

JAINCO DEVELOPERS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 13(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5382/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarm/S. Jainco Developers (P) Ltd, Vs. Acit, 8, New Rajdhani Enclave, Vikas Circle-13(1), Marg, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aabcj6893J

For Appellant: Shri Saurav Rohtagi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sandip Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(8)Section 234ASection 234B

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL

PRESIDENCY KID LEATHER PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP. CIRCLE-5(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1524/CHNY/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1524/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. S. Vidhya, F.C.AFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 154

appellate the ld. CIT(A) has not bothered about the rectification petition filed by the assessee under section 154 of the Act. 8. Section 154(8) of the Act lays down that the time limit for passing an order of rectification if application for amendment made by the assessee under

KAILASH CHANDRA MOONDRA ,SUMERPUR vs. ITO,, SUMERPUR

In the result, ITA No. 334/Jodh/2019 is allowed for statistical purpose and

ITA 339/JODH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur10 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 202Section 250Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

KAILASH CHANDRA MOONDRA ,SUMERPUR vs. ITO,, SUMERPUR

In the result, ITA No. 334/Jodh/2019 is allowed for statistical purpose and

ITA 334/JODH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur10 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 202Section 250Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

M.P. POONIA,JODHPUR vs. ITO, BIKANER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 389/JODH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 154Section 154(8)

Poonia vs. ITO “1. Order passed by the CIT (A) rejecting the application filed u/s 154 is barred by limitation. As per section 154(8) the authority shall pass order within 6 months on any application filed (u/s 154) after 1.6.2001. 2. The CIT(A) has rejected the application without ... reproduced here in below: “1.The order passed by the CIT (A), rejecting the application filed u/s 154, is barred by limitation. As per section 154(8) the authority shall pass order within 6 months on any application filed (u/s 154) after 1.6.2001. The assessee filed application u/s 154 before

KHUSHALRAO KESHAVRAO GARJE,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CPC,BANGLORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1866/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Rucha VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chogule

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

motion, and rather the same was passed pursuant to the rectification application dated 26/11/2019, filed by the assessee. As per section 154(8) of the Act in case of an application for amendment by the assessee, an order under section 154 of the Act can be passed either making

INDORE CONTRACT BRIDGE ASSOCIATION YEASHWANT CLUB,INDORE vs. ITO ,WARD-EXAMPTION , INDORE

ITA 403/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Indore Contract Bridge Cpc, Association, Bangalore बनाम/ Yashwant Club, Race Course Road, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aaaai 1652 F Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpandey, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2023

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

observe that the assessee has filed a rectification-application u/s 154 on 20.03.2019 to AO. We further note from a reading of section 154(8) that the AO was having a time-limit of 6 months to pass order on such application of assessee. Therefore, the assessee was justified