← All Phrases

“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
35
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
17
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
12
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
10
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
10
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

Block Education Officer, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer, (TDS), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 367/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.364 To 368/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2016-17 Block Education Officer G.E. Road, Durg-491 001 (C.G.) Pan: Jbpbo1308G

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

assessee for A.Y.2012-13 to 2016-17 on the ground of delay without adjudicating on merits of the case; (iii) Thereafter, the assessee filed miscellaneous applications before the Tribunal in MA Nos.18 to 22/RPR/2024 and the Tribunal recalled the matters vide its order dated 10.03.2025 after condoning the delay relying

Block Education Officer, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.364 To 368/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2016-17 Block Education Officer G.E. Road, Durg-491 001 (C.G.) Pan: Jbpbo1308G

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

assessee for A.Y.2012-13 to 2016-17 on the ground of delay without adjudicating on merits of the case; (iii) Thereafter, the assessee filed miscellaneous applications before the Tribunal in MA Nos.18 to 22/RPR/2024 and the Tribunal recalled the matters vide its order dated 10.03.2025 after condoning the delay relying

Block Education Officer, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 365/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.364 To 368/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2016-17 Block Education Officer G.E. Road, Durg-491 001 (C.G.) Pan: Jbpbo1308G

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

assessee for A.Y.2012-13 to 2016-17 on the ground of delay without adjudicating on merits of the case; (iii) Thereafter, the assessee filed miscellaneous applications before the Tribunal in MA Nos.18 to 22/RPR/2024 and the Tribunal recalled the matters vide its order dated 10.03.2025 after condoning the delay relying

Block Education Officer, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 364/RPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.364 To 368/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2016-17 Block Education Officer G.E. Road, Durg-491 001 (C.G.) Pan: Jbpbo1308G

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

assessee for A.Y.2012-13 to 2016-17 on the ground of delay without adjudicating on merits of the case; (iii) Thereafter, the assessee filed miscellaneous applications before the Tribunal in MA Nos.18 to 22/RPR/2024 and the Tribunal recalled the matters vide its order dated 10.03.2025 after condoning the delay relying

Bharatiya Barood Udhyog, Nagpur vs. DCIT JCIT Circle 2, Nagpur

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

ITA 293/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JakhotiaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

declaration filed under DTVsV Scheme, in that event, the assessee will be at liberty get this appeal restored in its original position by filing Miscellaneous Application and recall this order for hearing on merits. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced

Aysha Siddiqui, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Nagpur

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

ITA 329/NAG/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 50C

DTVsV Scheme, in that event, the 3 Aysha Siddiqui assessee will be at liberty get this appeal restored in its original position by filing Miscellaneous Application and recall this order for hearing on merits. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced

Andhra Pragathi Farmers Service Co-Op Society, Ramadurgam vs. ITO, Ward-1, Adoni

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 661/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.661/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Andhra Pragathi Farmers Vs. Income Tax Officer Service Coop. Society, Ward – 1 Ramadurgam Adoni Pan:Aaaar1876J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/04/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)

relevant part of the order of the learned CIT has been reproduced by the Tribunal while passing the order dated 4/3/2025 deciding the Miscellaneous Application which is again reproduced in the foregoing part of this order. Thus, in view of the fact that the delay in filing the return

M/S. Dhosa Chandaneswar Bratyajana Samity, South 24 Parganas vs. ITO, Ward - 1(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1043/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

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

Krishna Kumar Nathani & Sons (HUF), Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-4(1), Raipur

ITA 216/RPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.216/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2017-18 Krishna Kumar Nathani & Sons (Huf) Sadani Chowk, Sadar Bazar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aabhk8617A

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

appeal of the assessee for A.Y.2017-18 on the ground of delay without adjudicating on merits of the case; (iii) Thereafter, the assessee filed miscellaneous application before the Tribunal in MA No.25/RPR/2024 and the Tribunal recalled the matter vide its order dated 10.03.2025 after condoning the delay relying on the judgment

Surat Urban Development Authority, Suda Bhawan, Nanpura vs. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad, Aaykar Bhawan (Vejalpur)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 904/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2018-19 Surat Urban Development The Cit(Exemption) Authority (Suda) Vs Vejalpur, Ahmedabad. Suda Bhawan Nanpura, Surat. Pan : Aaals 0197 G (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Rasesh Shah, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/04/2025 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, AR
Section 11Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 2(15)Section 263

rejected SLP filed by the Department, as detailed therein and in this respect attention is also invited to the fact that Department had filed Miscellaneous Application No. 1849 of 2022 in Civil Appeal No. 21762 of 2017 seeking clarifications and requested that the Revenue to re do the assessments

Bharatbhai Maganbhai Maisuriya, Surat vs. ITO, Ward- 2(3)(1), Surat

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

ITA 585/SRT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.585/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Bharatbhai Maganbhai Maisuriya Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3)(1), 212, Ishwarpura, Navagam, Dindoli, Surat Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bcrpm2752B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Jayraj Dhakan, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2025

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

Silver Palace Co Operative Housing Service Society Limited, Surat vs. ITO Ward 2(3)(4), Surat

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

ITA 305/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.305/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Silver Palace Co Operative Housing Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3)(4), Service Society Ltd. Surat A/503, Kapodara To Utran Bi, At Utran, Surat- 394105 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaoas4849N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Akash Bakashwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr-Dr Date Of Hearing 17.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2025

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

Shri Siddhivinayak Co Operative Credit Society Limited Atpadi, Sangali vs. Assessing Officer, Sangli

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

ITA 2661/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri S S Viswanethra Raviassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath – Addl CIT

appeal is dismissed as “withdrawn”. In case assessee‟s application under 2 VSVS is rejected then assessee will be at liberty to file Miscellaneous Application within the time prescribed under the law for restoration of the instant appeal. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Apidor Abrasive Products Pvt Ltd, Nashik vs. Assessing Officer, Nashik

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

ITA 467/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Shilpa N. C
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

recalled matter and in first round of appeal, the appeal was decided in favour of assessee but 3 since the Department has filed Miscellaneous Application to recall the matter on the basis of Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgement in the case of Checkmate Services

Apurva Goenka, HUF, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 40, Kolkata

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

ITA 767/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Apurva Goenka, Huf Acit, Cir. 40 17, Chittaranjan Avenue, 3,Govt.Place (West), Kolkata, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata, Vs. West Bengal, 700001 West Bengal, 700072 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aakha8763L

For Appellant: Shri Miraz D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashutosh Kumar, DR

oppose. 03. Hence, I am 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. Apurva Goenka, HUF; AY 2014-15 04. In the result

Sanjay Kumar Agarwal, Kolkata vs. ITO, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 2430/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Ito, Central Circle 4(4) Bf-134, Salt Lake, Sector-1, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, North 24 Paraganas, Salt Lake, Shanti Pally, E.M. By Pass, Vs. West Bengal 700064 Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adcpa8997K Assessee By : Shri J.M. Thad, Ar Revenue By : Shri Archana Gupta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Archana Gupta, DR

oppose. 03. Hence, I am 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. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal; A.Y. 2013-14 04. In the result

Puran Chand HUF, Hisar vs. ITO Ward - 5, Hisar

ITA 483/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahayassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Forum Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, C-134, Defence Colony, Central Circle-19, New Delhi – 110 024. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacf8920D Assessee By : Ms Vanshika Mehta, Advocate & Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Monika Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2025

For Appellant: Ms Vanshika Mehta, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 254(2)

escaped adjudicating upon the aforesaid additional ground that was raised by the assessee company. Aggrieved by the decision of the assessee company filed 2 Miscellaneous application u/s 254(2) of Act seeking rectification of mistake and thus by order dated 09.05.2025, a coordinate Bench restored the appeal of the assessee ... hearing on 11.06.2025. Since, both the parties are informed in the open court, no fresh notice would follow. 5. In the result, the miscellaneous application of the assessee is allowed". 4. Now what comes up is that, the impugned Assessment order for AY 2014-2015 was passed

Hsbc Electronic Data Processing India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-2, Hyderabad

In the result, Ground No.6(b) is allowed and Ground

ITA 1613/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1613/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Hsbc Electronic Data Vs. Addl. C.I.T Processing India (P) Ltd Range-8 Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaach8235M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Cas Nusrath Farheen & Shyam Agarwal राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. M. Narmada, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/03/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CAs Nusrath Farheen &For Respondent: : Smt. M. Narmada, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 254(2)

A.Y.2010-11. Earlier, the appeal of the assessee was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 5/8/2024 and thereafter, the assessee filed a Miscellaneous Application in MA No.43/Hyd/ 2024 for rectification of mistake in the said order of the Tribunal. Page 1 of 10 ITA No 1613 of 2017 HSBC ... subject of rectification of the appeal u/s 254(2) of the Act and hence, the same is dismissed, 11. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is partly Allowed. The Registry is directed to fix the matter in due course for adjudication of ground

Fastspeed Creation Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 1565/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: The Bench That The Case May Be Adjourned Till The Vsvs Process Is Complete. It Is Seen That As Per The Vsvs The Assessee Has To Withdraw His Appeal As Per The Scheme.

Section 250

scheme. 5. Accordingly, we are dismissing this 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- 2024, for any reason, whatsoever. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Subodh Kumar, Patna vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(5) Patna, Patna

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

ITA 713/PAT/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Mar 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

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