“rectification u/s 154”

Rectification & RevisionSection 154Section 154426 judgments

The decision most relied on for rectification u/s 154 is Satyanarayan Laxminarayan Hegde v. MallikarjunBhavanappa Tirumale (1 SCR 890), cited in 18 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on rectification u/s 154

Satyanarayan Laxminarayan Hegde v. MallikarjunBhavanappa Tirumale

1 SCR 890 · 1960 · Reported

citing judgments

An error is not considered 'apparent from the record' for rectification purposes if it requires a lengthy process of reasoning or involves debatable points where multiple opinions are possible. A decision on a debatable point of law does not constitute a mistake apparent from the record.

Judgments citing rectification u/s 154

M/S. Tso Jhe Khangsar Charity Hospital Society, Mysuru vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption, Ward-1, Mysuru

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

ITA 912/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, S

Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 154

hence there is no cause of action lying with the original return there is a no order before the A.O. which was required rectification u/s 154. The rectification is only to rectify the mistake apparent from record in case of any order passed as mentioned in the said section

M/S. D. Banumaiah'S Educational Institutions, Mysuru vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption, Ward-1, Mysuru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 911/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department

Section 1Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

allow the exemption claimed u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. Hence, the assessee sought for rectification u/s 154 of the Act vide letter dated 18.01.2019. However, the AO noted that in the relevant assessment year, their gross receipt was more than Rs.1 crore and for claiming exemption u/s

Jaipal Singh Dendsay, Karnal vs. ITO Ward-1, Karnal

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 661/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Prem Rajpal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Siddharth Bhim Singh, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(10)(i)Section 143(1)Section 154

stated that on the date of the processing of return there was no mistake apparent from record which needs rectification u/s 154 of the Act. Page 3 of 6 ITA No.-661/Del/2023 Jaipal Singh Dendsay 9. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below

Anamika Garg, Dewas vs. CIT, Ujjain

ITA 214/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 Smt. Anamika Garg, Pcit, 117, Tukoganj Marg, Ujjain बनाम/ Nayapura, Vs. Dewas (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aiwpg 3922 D Assessee By Shri Suresh Gupta, Ar Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 02.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.01.2024

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54B

detriment of the Revenue, he has ample power to either reassess the earlier assessment in terms of section 147 or carry out rectification u/s 154 of the Act. He can’t usurp the power of the CIT and recommend a revision. No overlapping of powers of the authorities under

Shailaja Lalit Kotian, Mumbai vs. Central Processing Centrem Income Tax Department, Bengaluru

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

ITA 2960/MUM/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2023AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2960/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shailaja Lalit Kotian बिधम/ Central Processing B/25, 6Th Floor, Namaskar Center, Income Tax Vs. Maas Chs, Poonam Nagar, Department, Bengalure Mumbai-400093. Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra (E) Room No.615, Mumbai-400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agipk3192M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Jeetan Nagpal/Shri Sujit Kotian/Shri Ali Sayyed Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 29.06.2023 For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee Are As Under: - “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Appellate Order Dated 29.06.2023 [‘The Impugned Order’] Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [‘The Hon'Ble Cit(A)’] Is Based Upon Conjectures, Surmises & Assuming Incorrect Facts & Therefore, Is Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Jeetan Nagpal/Shri SujitFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)

Section 143(1)Section 199Section 234A

Thus, assessee was saddled with tax demand of Rs.1,53,906/- along with interest of Rs.1,62,350/-. Aggrieved, assessee filed rectification u/s 154 of the Act, which didn’t evoke any response. Assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), which was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) by passing

Mm Brothers, Lal Kothi Scheme, Jaipur vs. CPC, Bangalore, DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

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

ITA 653/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 653/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2017-18 M/s. M.M. Brothers E-666 Ekta Complex, Nakul Path, Lal Kothi Scheme, Jaipur 302 015 cuke Vs. The DCIT Circle-6 Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AARFM 8094 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Da

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 37Section 37(1)

expenditure of Rs.71,70,429/- u/s 37 and Rs.22,578/-on account of ESI/PF not deposited before due date. Subsequently, the assessee filed rectification u/s 154 of the Act and the same was decided by the CPC vide order dated 15-06-2019 and thus the request of the assessee ... expenditure of Rs.71,70,429/- u/s 37 and Rs.22,578/- on account of ESI/PF not deposited before due date. Subsequently the assessee filed rectification u/s 154 before the AO who after taking into consideration the matter of the case rejected the rectification application of the assessee. In first appeal

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)

appeal order and by not considering the Paper Book of 419 pages and Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in not making necessary Rectification u/s 154. 3. Ld. CIT (Appeals)-l erred in law in not considering a Grievance Petition cum Request letter dated 01.09.2018 by mistake while passing the Appeal Order ... reference to a Complaint dated 01.09.2018 and it's para-2 was not considered and Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in not making necessary Rectification u/s 154. I.T.A. Nos. 334 & 339/Jodh/2019 7 Assessment Year: 2012-13 5. Ld. CIT (Appeals)-l erred in law in passing an exparte order by mistake

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)

Orient Craft Limited, Gurgaon vs. DCIT Central Circle 2, Gurgaon

ITA 1097/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

Supreme Court decision in checkmate services Private Limited vCIT [2022] 448 ITR 518. 6. Because the assessing officer has erred in making rectification u/s 154 to order u/s 143(3) by making additions u/s 36(1)(va) which was not the subject matter of the assessment u/s 143(3) being ... limited scrutiny not covering the point of discussion u/s 36(1 )(va). 7. Because the assessing officer has erred in making rectification u/s 154 to order u/s 143(3) by making additions u/s 36(1)(va) since it is not a mistake apparent from record. Date of order of section

Sachin Kataria, Panipat vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Karnal

Accordingly, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3037/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 154Section 154(3)

income dated 31st October, 2019. During assessment proceedings, the same were accepted as business income however subsequently, the AO exercised powers of rectification u/s 154 of the Act and by order dated 16.09.2021 enhanced the tax liability by invoking the provisions of Section 115BBE of the Act instead

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

fact and summarily rejected the plea of the applicant.’’ 21 Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed an application for rectification u/s 154 of the IT Act, 1961 stating for rectification of mistake of law 3 WHOLERY INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD VS DCIT, CIRCLE-2, KOTA apparent ... above, since this is not the mistake apparent from record and due to invalid return for the AY 2017-18, the application for rectification u/s 154 filed by the assessee is hereby rejected. 2.2 In first appeal, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing

Sidharth Co-Operative Credit & Thrift Society Limited, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer-2(1), Bhilai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 241/RPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 241/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sidharth Co-Operative Credit & Thrift Society Limited 01, Nayapara, Titrudhi, Durg (C.G.)- 490 020 Pan : Aagas2471Q

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

u/s 143(1)(a), dated 07.06.2019, had been subjected to appeal before the CIT(Appeals), then, the right of the assessee to seek rectification u/s 154 before the A.O was confined to only such matter/matters other than that which 6 Sidharth Co-operative Credit & Thrift Society Limited

Savlon Sulz Private Limited, Bhilwara vs. ACIT, Circle, Bhilwara

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

ITA 4/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Joshi, JCIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 154

same is rejected. Accordingly, it was decided to hear the ld. DR and decide the appeal on merits on a small issue of rectification u/s 154. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee company engaged in the business of manufacturing & trading of synthetic fabrics, and filed

Jaisalmer Vikas Samiti, Jaisalmer vs. ITO, Exemption, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 116/JODH/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.116/Jodh/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 7

calculated on the amount to Rs.9,30,659/- and tax liability was calculated amount to Rs. 1,37,998/-. The assessee made the rectification u/s 154 but the ld. AO had not accepted and confirmed the demand in intimation u/s 143(1). Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before ... view of the legal position as explained above, we are of the view that the AO ought to have accepted the application for rectification u/s. 154 of the Act. We accordingly direct the AO to allow application u/s. 154 of the Act and rectify the intimation. 10. In the result

ITO, Hisar vs. Sh. Sant Singh Prop., Hisar

ITA 2547/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 143CSection 147Section 148Section 154Section 54BSection 54B(2)

file and there is no mistake in the order passed by the AO on 23.12.2010, so there is no need to pass any rectification u/s 154. This stand taken by the AO clearly shown that there was no mistake in the order passed by AO on 23.12.2010 and so there

Schenck Process Europe Gmbh, Germany vs. DCIT - CPC, Banglore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9214/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaschench Process Europe Gambh, Vs. Dcit, Pallaswiesenstrasse 100, Cpc, Bangalore Darmstadt, Germany (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaocs8500Q

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 250

Infact the provisions of section 154(5) of the Act also provides for reduction in the income of the assessee for which rectification u/s 154 could be done. For the sake of convenience, the provisions of section 154(5) of the Act are reproduced hereunder: “Where any such amendment

Sunil Pagaria, Udaipur vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Udaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 198/JODH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234Section 54F

interpretation of section 54F and the case laws furnished, the exemption claimed u/s 54F Rs 2054894/ has been disallowed to the extent, vide rectification u/s 154. (3) Alternatively: how assessment completed u/s 143 (3), proceeding u/s 154 is not amenable? Copy of reply dated 04/05/2018 attached

Dinesh Infrastructure Private Limited, Jodhpur vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 76/JODH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

assessee requested for rectification of order u/s 200A. The AO passed an order of correction on 10.12.2017. Again the assessee applied for rectification u/s 154 for which the AO passed the order on 13.06.2019 without giving any relief as requested by the assessee. The count of correction statements processed ... impugned intimations u/s 200A dated 23.12.2013 as prescribed u/s.249(2) of the Act. It has only filed an appeal against the rectification u/s. 154 r.w.s.200A dated 13.06.2019 wherein the levy of Late Filing Fee u/s.234E vide original intimation u/s.200A dated 23.12.2013 is sought to be challenged after a delay

Dinesh Infrastrurcture Private Limited, Jodhpur vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 75/JODH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

Sushil Kumar Marlecha, Pali vs. Deputy/Asstt, CIT (CPC-TDS) / ITO, TDS-1, Ghaziabad / Jodhpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 123/JODH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 205CSection 206CSection 234E

intimation u/s 200A, viz. (i) file rectification- application u/s 154, or (ii) file appeal u/s 246A. We observe that the remedy to file rectification u/s 154 is not only one of the available remedies but also a simpler remedy and practically resorted to by many of the assessees, particularly