“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

National Highway Authority of India, Kanpur vs. A CIT (TDS), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 243/LKW/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2012-13 National Highway Authority V. Addl. Cit (Tds) Of India 7/199, Radiance Town, 53, Basant Vihar, Naubasta, Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur- Kanpur-208021. 208002. Pan:Aaatn1936H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 06 10 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 17 10 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 154Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 275

penalty order as passed by the Addl. CIT (TDS) and as upheld by the CIT(NFAC), overlooking and ignoring the petition for rectification u/s 154 of the act, being totally in disregard to the provision of the act, being violative to the principles of natural justice, totally unwarranted be quashed

Vipulkumar Parsottam Padmani, Surat vs. ITO, Circle 3(2), Surat

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed with order as to cost

ITA 611/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 69C

rectification of assessment order u/s 143(3) of the act of AY 2017-18 DATED:20/12/2019 does not fall under the purview of rectification u/s 154 of the income tax, 1961 as the matter raised has been discussed in the assessment order. In view of the above your rectification application

Gauri Ananya Educational Beneficiary Trust, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal is dismissed for statistical purposes

ITA 83/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 161Section 164(1)

have taxed the assessee at MMR in the aforesaid intimation dated 13/04/2018 nor should the CPC have rejected the assessee’s application for rectification u/s 154 of the Act vide aforesaid order dated 24/07/2018. He placed reliance on order of Single Member Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow

Deepak Kumar, Muzaffarpur vs. CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 55/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

scope and limitations of section 143(1) of the Act, the validity of the revised Form No. 3CD and the scope of rectification u/s 154 of the Act. However, he observed that the CPC acted within the jurisdiction u/s 143(1) and 154 of the Act. The adjustments made were

Collective Efforts for Voluntary Action, Chamba vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Solan

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for Statistical

ITA 118/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 118/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Collective Efforts For The Ito Exemption Voluntary Action, बनाम Ward, Ceva Parisar Chamba, Solan Vs. Udaipur, Khas Chamba 176310 H.P. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aabac2890C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Parikshit Chauhan, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28-07-2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13-10-2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.11.2024 Of Ld. Addl. / Jcit(A), Thane For A.Y. 2017-18. 2 118-Chd-2025- Collective Efforts For Voluntary Action, Chamba

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Chauhan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr. DR

Section 12Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

exemption granted to the Assessee u/s 12AA of the Act and processed the return raising huge demand. The Assessee filed an application for rectification u/s 154 of the Act but that was also rejected by the CPC. When the matter was brought in appeal before the Ld. Addl

Vimal Kumar Attrey, Sirsa vs. ITO, Ward -1, Sirsa

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1089/CHANDI/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1089/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Vimal Kumar Attrey, The Ito, बनाम Srs/B-15/076, Ward 1, Street No. 2, Sirsa Vs. Old Court Colony, Sirsa Haryana 125055 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aaopa0288L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Virtual Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Kartik Garg, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28-07-2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13-10-2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.11.2023 Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi

For Appellant: Shri. Kartik Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 10

disallowed the claim amounting INR 11,37,117/-. 4. That against the intimation order dated 17.03.2023, the appellant has filed the rectification u/s 154 on 20.03.2023 and the Ld. DDIT, CPC has passed the impugned order u/s 154 on 11.07.2023 which uphold the variation as proposed

Rise Advertising Pvt. Ltd., Madurai vs. ITO, TDS, Madurai

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

ITA 251/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.251/Chny/2025 िनधा7रण वष7 /Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT

Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, there should be an original order or an order already existing which may be subject to rectification u/s 154 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961.” 5. The assessee has filed TDS statement in Form-26Q for Quarter.- 1 of Financial Year ... order cannot be passed. We do not agree with the submission of the Ld. AR that there was no original order for making rectification u/s. 154 of the Act. As the intimation clearly refers to the earlier order passed u/s. 200A of the Act by the CPC which has been

Surbhi Anand, South Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Agra

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 258/AGR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2023-24] Surbhi Anand, Acit, C-155, Basement, Lajpat Circle-1(1)(1), Nagar-2, South Delhi, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Sanjay Place, Delhi-110024 Agra, Uttar Pradesh-282002 Pan-Acypa6580B Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sahib P. Satsangi, Ca Respondent By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.10.2025 Order, Per Brajesh Kumar Singh, Am

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 145Section 154Section 193

subsequent order passed u/s 154/143(3) by CPC. In this context it can be observed that the scope and ambit of power of rectification u/s 154 came to be considered and decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in T. S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Brothers

Cpl Holdings LLP (Successor to Cpl Holdings Private Limited), Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1022/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

that if there was a mistake in the figure of depreciation as disallowed by the Assessing Officer, that was subject matter of simple rectification u/s 154 of the Act and no revisional order under Section 263 of the Act could have been passed on such an issue

Sarnath Co-Op Housing Society Ltd, Desai Road vs. CIT (Appeal), Piramal Chamber

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3207/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 143(1)Section 250

management and staff. Although the return was processed and an intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act was received, The rectification u/s 154 was filed for the relevant year, since an application against 143(1) order was pending did not provide a ground to file an appeal

National Welfare Foundation, Mumbai vs. ITO Exemption Ward 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3271/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjunwala, Ld. C.AFor Respondent: Shri Letaqat Ali Aafaqui, Ld. Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 3Section 5

WELFARE FOUNDATION PAN: AAATN 4022 F Α.Υ.: 2011-12 Ref.: Intimation u/s 143(1A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 Sub.: Request for rectification u/s 154 of 1.T Act, 1961. Under instructions from our above named client and with reference to above, we hereby state, submit and request

Puneet Khanna, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3046/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Shri Puneet Khanna Vs. Income Tax Officer 8/51, Ramesh Nagar Ward-3(1) New Delhi Gurgaon Pan: Aajpk7067L Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. R. R. Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 Order

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

allowed credit of TDC and TCS of Rs.1,50,114/- and raised the demand of Rs.1,58,830/-. 3. Further, Assesseefiled online rectification u/s 154 of the Act on 28/01/2022 requesting to reprocess the return. CPC vide order u/s 154 read with 143 (1) of the Act dated 25/04/2022 ... rectified the intimation and retained the same demand. Further the Assessee had filed rectification u/s 154 of the Act on 28/04/2022 and CPC vide revised order u/s 154 r.w. 143(1) of the Act dated 22/06/2022 rectified the order and allowed the credit

M/S. Kushang Security and House Keeping Service Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2964/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 254(1)

assessed income as per intimation u/s 143(1) was determine at Rs. 2,28,38,892/-. Further assessee opted to apply for rectification u/s 154 of the Act, which was proceeded by the CPC and passed an order u/s 154 on 20.10.2020 with the same income as was assessed under

Mcm Developers, Aurangabad vs. DCIT. Central Circle-1, Aurangabad

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

ITA 362/PUN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 154Section 269SSection 270ASection 271DSection 40A(3)

permits rectification of a mistake apparent from the record & in the instant case in hand there is no such apparent mistake which needs rectification u/s 154 of the IT Act. Ld. AR further submitted that as per original assessment order the Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee ... passed by Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of T.S. Balaram, Income-tax Officer vs. Volkart Brothers (1971) 82 ITR 50 (SC), rectification u/s 154 of the IT Act is not permissible. Hon’ble Supreme court in the above case T.S. Balaram, Income-tax Officer vs. Volkart Brothers

Rajesh Venkatesh Helavar, Bengaluru, Karnataka vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 866/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Kirath Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate – Standing

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

appeal before us. 5. The learned AR before us argued that the delay was not deliberate. The assessee first believed that rectification u/s 154 would cure the issue. The learned AR further submitted that the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) is attributable to Covid

Mr. Suresh Shantilal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 16(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4752/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jotwani, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Bhagat, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 43CSection 48Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 56(2)(x)

valuation as prevalent at that particular time. The AO in the assessment order itself has also mentioned that addition would be subjected to rectification u/s 154 of the Act on receipt of valuation report from the DVO, which is not available and/or not produced by the DVO during the assessment

M/S. Chennai Business Tower Pvt. Ltd., Kanchipuram vs. PCIT-4, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1570/CHNY/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1570/Chny/2025, धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 M/S. Chennai Business Tower Pcit-4, Private Limited (Formerly Known Vs Chennai. As Rmz Infinity (Chennai) Pvt. . Ltd), 110, Mount Poonamallee Road, Porur, Porur S.O. Kanchipuram – 600 116. [Pan:Aaacd-2287-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Raghupathy, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am:

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Raghupathy, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 24Section 263

dated 04.11.2010 after a gap of nearly 12 years. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that it had made a request for rectification u/s 154 long back on 27.12.2010. It is the case of the assessee that as there was no action, it filed another request for rectification

Arun Dhir, Chandigarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 97/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 97/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Arun Dhir, Vs The Dcit, House No.1150, Sector 21-B, Circle-1, Chandigarh. Sector 17,Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aarpd0180F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 15Section 154

second question arose whether it is an apparent error which can be rectified u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act. The power of rectification u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act can be exercised only when the mistake which is sought to be rectified is an obvious and patent mistake

Jhaji Shikshan Samiti, Durg vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Exemption Circle, Bhopal

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

ITA 476/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year: 2018-19 Jhaiji Shikshan Samiti, Arora Niwas, Ward No. 08, Durg Road, Bemetara, Durg-491335, Chhattisgarh Pan: Aaatj7624B ……….Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Yogesh Sethia [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Manisha Kinnu [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 246ASection 250

compliance with provisions of section 12A(1)(b) of the Act. 3.2 Against former denial, the assessee filed an application for rectification u/s 154 of the Act on 19/12/2019. Reverberating the reasons spelt in summary assessment the Ld. CPC rejected the said application for rectification on 06/01/2020. Aggrieved

Kothari Agritech Pvt. Ltd, Solapur vs. The DCIT, Circle-1, Solapur

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2455/PUN/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 80Section 801ASection 80ISection 80J

that Form 10CCB was not filed within the due date. The assessee being aggrieved by the said intimation order, filed an application for rectification u/s 154 of the Act before the Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (“JAO”). Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS, amongst others ... Madras High court, also quoted by the assessee, it can be concluded that any erroneous assessment cannot be subject matter for rectification u/s 154 and in such a scenario assessee should get it rectified only under procedure known to law by carrying the matter before the appropriate authority