“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

Aarush Jain Family Trust, Ashoknagar vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Ward Gwalior, Gwalior

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 170/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(1)Section 250

Misc. app No. 665/2021 in suo-moto W.P(c) No. 3/2020 in civil original jurisdiction and in re cognizance of extension of limitation with miscellaneous application No. 29/2022, in miscellaneous application No. 655/2021 in suo- moto petition(c) no. 03/2020 and vide para 5(1) of its order dated

Aarush Jain Family Trust, Ashoknagar vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Ward Gwalior, Gwalior

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 169/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(1)Section 250

Oxford Siksha Samiti, Bhopal vs. ITO, Exemption, Gwalior

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 157/AGR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

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

Misc. app No. 665/2021 in suo-moto W.P(c) No. 3/2020 in civil original jurisdiction and in re cognizance of extension of limitation with miscellaneous application No. 29/2022, in miscellaneous application No. 655/2021 in suo-moto petition(c) 3 | P a g e ITA No.156 & 157/Agr/2025 no. 03/2020 and vide

Oxford Siksha Samiti, Bhopal vs. ITO, Exemption, Gwalior

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 156/AGR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

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

Misc. app No. 665/2021 in suo-moto W.P(c) No. 3/2020 in civil original jurisdiction and in re cognizance of extension of limitation with miscellaneous application No. 29/2022, in miscellaneous application No. 655/2021 in suo-moto petition(c) 3 | P a g e ITA No.156 & 157/Agr/2025 no. 03/2020 and vide

Eastern Food Industries Pvt. Ltd., Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 2 (1), Patna

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 270/PAT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Am

For Appellant: Shri D.V. Pathy, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR

oppose. 05. Hence, we are dismissing the appeal as withdrawn with a liberty to the assessee to get the appeal revived by filing necessary miscellaneous application if the assessee is not successful in the VSVS-24, for any reason, whatsoever. 06. Inthe result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Natwest Markets Plc, Kolkata vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation - 1(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 272/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Rakesh Mishra]

oppose. 3. Hence, we are dismissing the appeal as withdrawn with the liberty to the assessee to get the appeal revived by filing necessary miscellaneous application if the assessee is not successful in the VSVS-24, for any reason, whatsoever. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee

M/S. Mahendra Kumar Jain, Chennai vs. ACIT, Ncc-4(1), Chennai

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

ITA 447/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:447/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 Shri Mahendra Kumar Jain, The Asst. Commissioner Of No.56/B1, Pantheon Road, Vs. Income Tax, Egmore, Non-Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. Pan: Aanpm 2662B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Anandd Babunath, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri Anandd Babunath, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 264Section 56

filing the appeal before the CIT(A) after excluding the period during the Covid pandemic as per the Hon’ble Apex Court order in Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 vide order dated 23.03.2020 and in Miscellaneous Application No.21 of 2022 vide order dated 10.01.2022 (period excluded from

ITO Corp Ward 2 (1), Chennai vs. M/S Eskay Cartons (P) Ltd, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the MA filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 417/CHNY/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.417/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Eskay Cartons (P) Ltd., No. 6 & 8, Cenotaph 1St Street, Corporate Ward 2(1), Chennai. Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Aacce6648P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) M.A. No. 182/Chny/2022 [In Ita No. 78/Chny/2011] िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Eskay Cartons (P) Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of No. 6 & 8, Cenotaph 1St Street, Income Tax, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Company Circle Ii(1), Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Ms. T. Mythili, Jcit Assessee By : Shri K. Ravi, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Appellant-Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.11.2013 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Ii, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2005-06. 2

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 263

Chennai for the assessment year 2005-06. 2 I.T.A. No.417/Chny/18 & M.A. No. 182/Chny/22 2. Since both the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee pertains to same assessee, with the consent of both the parties, both the appeal and MA were heard together ... Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 3 I.T.A. No.417/Chny/18 & M.A. No. 182/Chny/22 M.A. No. 182/Chny/2022 : AY 2005-06 5. When the Miscellaneous Application is taken up for hearing, we note that the assessee filed the M.A. against the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 78/Mds/2011 dated

DCIT, Circle - 19(1), Delhi vs. Pc Jeweller Limited, Delhi

ITA 3084/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 35D

order is attached as Annexure-2. 4.0 Further, reliance in this regard is placed on the order of Hon'ble Supreme court in Miscellaneous application no. 21 of 2022 regarding cognizance for Extension of Limitation has extended the period of limitation and held that the period from15-03-2020 till ... Supreme Court has passed order on 10/01/2022 in In Re: Cognizance directed that for Extension of Limitation (Supreme Court of India) Miscellaneous Application No. 21 of 2022, date of order: 10/01/2022, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has the period from 15/03/2020 to 28/02/2022 be excluded for the purpose

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Cr Building vs. Pc Jeweller Limited, Delhi

ITA 2581/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 35D

JCIT(in-Situ), Circle-1, Patna vs. Technoculture Building Centre Private Limited, Patna

ITA 41/PAT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna03 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Section 142(1)Section 145Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

case of Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd 305 ITR 225 (SC), some relevant portions need to be extracted: “In the instant case, miscellaneous application came to be filed by the assessee under sub-section (2) of section 254 stating therein that a decision of the 'Jurisdictional Court', i.e., the High

Raghoba Ramchandra Sadekar, Sindhudurg vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Kudal

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

ITA 1500/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A. D. Kulkarni

Section 69A

prayer made in the application dated 29.05.2025, we hereby dismiss the instant appeal as withdrawn. However, liberty is granted to the assessee to file Miscellaneous Application in case the assessee is not able to fully succeed under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 however such Miscellaneous Application

Cherry Jain Family Trust, Ashoknagar vs. Income Tax Officer, CPC Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 35/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 143(1)Section 250

Misc. app No. 665/2021 in suo-moto W.P(c) No. 3/2020 in civil original jurisdiction and in re cognizance of extension of limitation with miscellaneous application No. 29/2022, in miscellaneous application No. 655/2021 in suo-moto petition(c) no. 03/2020 and vide 2 | P a g e para

The Lohia Truck Operator Union, Jalandhar vs. ITO Ward Nakodar, Nakodar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 522/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 250Section 271BSection 4

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. I.T.A. Nos. 522 and 523/Asr/2024 4 Assessment Year

Shree Raghukul Texprints Private Limited, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 842/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing) Shree Raghukul Texprints Pvt. Vs. The Ito, Ltd., Ward – 2(1)(2), 146-A, Tati Thaiya, Palsana, Surat Palsana, Surat - 394315 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcs3524R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 250

assessee under DTVSV, 2024 does not get finally settled for any reason whatsoever, then both the parties are at liberty to prefer Miscellaneous Application before this Tribunal for restoration of the appeal or any further direction and in such event, the appeal shall get restored. The Assessing Officer is directed

Manjulaben Amrutbhai Patel, Surat vs. Officer Incharge, NFAC Jurisdictional Ofiicer - ITO Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

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

ITA 1344/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1344/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Manjulaben Amrutbhai Patel Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(1), 2 Tirumala Society, Opp. Balaji Vs. Surat, Aayakar Bhavan, Anavil Nagar, Piplod, Bharthana, B.O. Business Centre, Haira-Adjan Road, Umra- 395 007 Maher Nagar, Jalaram Society, Adajan Gam-Surat-395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bpbpp 5728 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr-Dr Date Of Hearing 19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2025

Section 250

assessee under DVSV-2024 does not get finally settled for any reason whatsoever, then both the parties are at liberty to prefer Miscellaneous Application before this Tribunal for restoration of the appeal or any further direction and in such event, the appeal shall get restored. The Assessing Officer is directed

Anmol Agrifarms Inputs Pvt Ltd, Jasidih vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Patna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 11/PAT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna27 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 11/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Anmol Agrifarms Inputs Pvt. Limited,………Appellant Jisidih Industrial Area Chhota Manikpur, Jasidih, Deoghar-814112, Jharkhand [Pan:Aahca4114F] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Revenue Building, 3Rd Floor, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna-800001, Bihar Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Sm. Rinku Singh, Cit, D.R. Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 91

case, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee with the liberty to the assessee to get the appeal revived by filing necessary miscellaneous application if the assessee is not successful in the VSVS-24, for any reason, whatsoever. 2 Anmol Agrifarms Inputs Pvt. Limited 5. In the result, the appeal

Syed Imtyaz Ahsan, Barh vs. ITO Ward 6(2) Patna, Patna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 280/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 91

Sis Cash Services Private Limited, Patna vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

ITA 240/PAT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 May 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Kavita Jha, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

Dlf Home Developers Limited (Successor to Irama Estates Private Limited-PAN Aaaci5422K), Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 12(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 2477/KOL/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 May 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2477/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Dlf Home Developers Limited,……….…………Appellant (Successor To Irama Estates Pvt. Ltd.- Pan Aaaci5422K), Dlf Centre, 9Th Floor, Delhi-110001 [Pan:Aaccd0037H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………….…………...Respondent Ward-12(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Esplanade, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Satyajeet Goel, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: April 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 26, 2025 O R D E R

case, I dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn with the liberty to the assessee to get the appeal revived by filing necessary miscellaneous application if the assessee is not successful in the VSVS-24, for any reason, whatsoever. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee