“miscellaneous application”

AppealsSection 254(2)Section 254(2)1,501 judgments

The decision most relied on for miscellaneous application is 254(2) of the Act. In Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT (295 ITR 466), cited in 35 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on miscellaneous application

254(2) of the Act. In Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT

295 ITR 466 · 2007 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

A mistake apparent from the record that prejudices a party is rectifiable under section 254(2) of the Act.

CIT v. Birla Janahit Trust

208 ITR 372 · 1994 · High Court

citing judgments

Expenditure on salaries and miscellaneous expenses for carrying out the trust's objectives is considered an application of income for charitable purposes. Liabilities for employee benefits, such as gratuity and leave encashment, are accrued liabilities even if payable in the future.

Jagmittar Sain Bhagat v. Director, Health Services

10 SCC 136 · 2013 · Reported

citing judgments

A party can challenge the maintainability of an appeal, even if the delay in filing cross-objections is condoned due to bonafide reasons.

Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. v. Union of India

238 CTR 353 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The Supreme Court held that the provisions for obtaining approval from the Chief Commissioner of Customs and Excise (CoD) had outlived their utility, leading to the recall of previous orders that relied on such approvals.

CIT v. State Bank of Hyderabad

382 ITR 499 · 2016 · Reported

citing judgments

A Tribunal order recalling an earlier order that was dismissed for want of condonation of delay approval is interlocutory and does not adjudicate on merits.

Judgments citing miscellaneous application

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Maruti Suzuki India Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, both recalled appeals are allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 4174/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 254(2)

this common order. 2. The captioned appeals were decided vide common order dated 12.03.2024 of the Tribunal. The assessee filed two separate Miscellaneous Applications (MA) against both appeals on the following issues: (i) ITA 4174/Del/2010 - Revenue Appeal: The assessee filed MA for the reason that while adjudicating Ground of Appeal ... dated 19.06.2019 issued for assessment year 2009-20, is deleted and the grounds of appeal No.6 is accordingly allowed. 10. In the result, the miscellaneous application no 354/Del/2024 is allowed" Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. 2.3 Since both MAs were allowed vide MA Order dated 13.03.2025; therefore, the Registry revived both

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both recalled appeals are allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 4081/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 254(2)

Hi Techno Control System Pvt Ltd, Dombivili vs. Ds Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Mumbai

ITA 1525/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1525/Mum/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17 Hi Techno Control System Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.1, Bali8Ram Patil Industrial Estate, Kalyan Shili Road, Behind G.R. Patil College, Sonarpada, Kalyan-Dombivali-421 204 Pan : Aacch0649D ........अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Mumbai ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Himanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing :20.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2025 2 Hi Techno Control System Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi, Sr. DR

Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 254(2)Section 272ASection 272A(2)(K)Section 272A(2)(k)

ITAT Mumbai was disposed of vide order dated 15/11/2022, however, the matter has been recalled, on the request of the revenue by filing of Miscellaneous Application, raising the ground that there is a mistake apparent on record within the meaning of section 254(2) of the act, that the impugned ... कार्यालय Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (DR) ITAT-6, E-Bench, Mumbai Respected Sir, 18 APR 2024 E-BENCH Mumbai मुंबई Sub:- Miscellaneous Application No 530/M/23 (arising out of ITA 1525/M/22 in the case of Hi-Techno Controls System Pvt. Ltd. (TAN: PNEH06072D) (PANAACH06449D

Krishan Lal, New Delhi, India vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi, India

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2680/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Lal Vs. Ito 14A/47, W.E.A.Karol Bagh New Delhi New Delhi 11005 Pan No. Aagpl8036P (Appellant) (Respondent)

defect as indicated in the order sheet. None is present today for assessee. 3. The appeal is dismissed with the liberty to file the miscellaneous application to restore the appeal, after removing the defects as indicated in the order sheet. 4. In the result the appeal of the assessee

ACIT (TDS), Jodhpur vs. M/S. Shree India Sino Gums Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur

ITA 121/JODH/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur20 Aug 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Blem.A. No. 105/Jodh/2012 (Assessment Year 2007-08) (Arising Out Of Ita No. 120/Jodh/2012) M.A. No. 106/Jodh/2012 (Assessment Year 2008-09) (Arising Out Of Ita No. 121/Jodh/2012) And

Jodhpur. PAN No. AABCS9076Q Smt. Raksha Birla, C.A. Smt. Anuradha, Addl. CIT-DR 31.07.2025. 20.08.2025. PER DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, A.M.: ORDER The captioned miscellaneous applications are instituted at the instant of the department against the Tribunal orders in ITA Nos. ITA No. 120 and 121/Jodh/2012 in respect with Assessment

ACIT (TDS), Jodhpur vs. M/S. Shree India Sino Gums Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur

ITA 120/JODH/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur20 Aug 2025AY 2007-08

AABCS9076Q Smt. Raksha Birla, C.A. Smt. Anuradha, Addl. CIT-DR 31.07.2025. 20.08.2025. Vs PER DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, A.M.: ORDER The captioned miscellaneous applications are instituted at the instant of the department against the Tribunal orders in ITA Nos. ITA No. 120 and 121/Jodh/2012 in respect with Assessment years

Shri Alpesh Navinbhai Barot, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 927/AHD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

appeal of the assessee was dismissed for the reason that no compliance was made by the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee had filed a Miscellaneous Application which was allowed vide order MA No.132/Ahd/2024 in ITA No.927/Ahd/2023 dated 29.04.2025 and the matter was recalled for fresh hearing. Shri Alpesh Navinbhai Barot

Charanjit Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 45(3), New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 5520/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarita No. 5518/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5519/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5520/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Charanjit Singh, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Top Floor, Near Tilak Nagar, Ward 45(3), Old Mahavir Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi-1100 18 Pan No. Auxps3613A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G S Kohli, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansara, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 in consolidated manner and other for assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12 in consolidated manner. Miscellaneous application in this behalf was also preferred before the Hon’ble ITAT in the same manner for assessment years

Charanjit Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 45(3), New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 5519/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri G S Kohli, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansara, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Charanjit Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 45(3), New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 5518/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri G S Kohli, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansara, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Niranjan Koirala, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2253/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.2253/िद"ी/2010(िन.व. 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-31(1), R. No. 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2 Block, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Civic Centre, Jln Marg, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi बनाम Vs. Niranjan Koirala, 27, Akbar Road, New Delhi ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaupk-0483-B Assessee By : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Department By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 23.05.2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 18.02.2010, For Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. This Appeal Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 20.07.2018. Thereafter, The Revenue Filed Miscellaneous Application Seeking Rectification In The Order Of Tribunal On The Ground That The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Vide Application Dated 13.08.2014 Remained To Be Decided. The Tribunal In Ma No. 732/Del/2018 Vide Order Dated 10.07.2023 Recalled The Order

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 54F

dated 18.02.2010, for assessment year 2006-07. 2. This appeal was decided by the Tribunal vide order dated 20.07.2018. Thereafter, the Revenue filed Miscellaneous Application seeking rectification in the order of Tribunal on the ground that the additional grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue vide application dated 13.08.2014 remained

DB (International) Stock Brokers Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-18, Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 5876/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

assessee’s declaration made under VSVS is not accepted, the Registry shall not insist for filing of application for condonation of delay, if the Miscellaneous Application for recalling the order is filed beyond time on account of delay in communication of outcome under VSVS. [Revenue. M/s. Nannusamy Mohan

DB (International)Stock Brokers Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-18, Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 5875/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Ahluwalia Contracts India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 5104/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 बनाम Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Ahluwalia Contracts India Income Tax, Vs. Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-31, A-177, Phase-1, Tehkhand New Delhi. Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi. Pan No.Aabca4303K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Cross Objection No.37/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 5104/Del/2024) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 बनाम M/S Ahluwalia Contracts Deputy Commissioner Of India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax, A-177, Phase-1, Tehkhand Central Circle-31, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Aabca4303K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 14ASection 69C

proving that the issues in appeal falls under any exceptions provided by the CBDT in its Circular the Revenue is at liberty to file miscellaneous application to recall the order and to hear the appeal on merits. Similarly, the assessee is also given liberty to file a miscellaneous application

Amserve Consultants Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 1(1), New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1439/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench (hereinafter referred to as "Hon'ble ITAT) vide order dated 12 October 2023. b) Subsequently, the Appellant filed a Miscellaneous Application (MA 165/Del/2024) against the aforesaid order. c) The said Miscellaneous Application was disposed-off vide order dated 16 May 2025 wherein the Hon'ble ITAT

Sri Monoj Singh, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward-46(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 2046/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(2)

earlier appeal of the has been dismissed on account of non-appearance before the Tribunal which was restored by an order passed in Miscellaneous application No.52/Kol/2023. 5. The Ld. D.R though supports the impugned order but did not raise any objection in remitting the appeal of the assessee ... this fact that the present appeal has been restored after dismissal and it has been restored on an application filed by the assessee being Miscellaneous application no. 52/Kol/2023 vide order dated 20.11.2023. In the present case, the prayer of the A.R is that the assessee has to give an opportunity

Smt Veena Vijay Murkibhavi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4085/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Mandar Vaidya, A/RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. D/R

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 234BSection 45Section 54Section 56

Accordingly, the addition made by the Assessing Officer is deleted. Ground raised by the assessee is allowed.” 7. Due to some rectifiable mistakes, a miscellaneous application was preferred by the assessee and this Tribunal in M.A. No. 151/Mum/2024, rectifying the mistake held as under:- 4. We have given a thoughtful

Lokmangal Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Solapur vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Office Circle - 2, Solapur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1179/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1179/Pun/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Lokmangal Co-Operative Asstt. Cit, Circle-2, Bank Ltd, Solapur 128, Murarji Peth, Near Vs. Sevasadan, High School, Solapur-413001 Maharashtra Pan-Aaaal0119J अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By: Ca Pramod Shingte Department By: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing: 07-08-2025 Date Of 13-08-2025 Pronouncement:

For Appellant: CA Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 250

dismissed as withdrawan on account of the application being addmitted under DTVSV Scheme, 2024. We however grant liberty to the assessee to file the miscellaneous application for re-calling of this order in case the assessee is unable to get Form No. 4 from the Income Tax Department and application

Fortum India Private Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT Tpo 1(2)(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 345/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Pareekfortum India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1A, Vandana Building, Tpo-1(2)(2), 11 Tolstoy Marg, Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccf0436G Assessee By : Ms. Arya Asopa, Ar Revenue By: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/08/2025

For Appellant: Ms. Arya Asopa, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 4Section 91(1)Section 92C

Revenue for any reason whatsoever, the assessee can make a prayer before the Bench for recalling of the order by filing a miscellaneous application for restoration of appeal. The Registry will place such petition before the Bench concerned. 5. In view of the aforesaid observations, we dismiss appeal with liberty

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Kolkata vs. Vrinda Engineers Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2414/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 250

appeal or this case falls under any of the exceptions provided in the instruction, then the Revenue will be at liberty to file a Miscellaneous Application for recall of this order and revival of the appeal. Such an application should be filed within the time limit provided