“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

M/S Woodstock Laminates Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 493/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Woodstock Laminates Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ltd., 1/103, Whs. Kirti Ward-27(3), Nagar, New Delhi Delhi-1100 15 Pan No. Aaacw5831E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, SR. DR

Section 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. 5. In view of the aforesaid observations, we dismiss appeal with liberty

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Gogoal Hydro Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 3940/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Circle 10(1), Vs. M/S. Gogoal Hydro Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. B-3/50, Safdarjung Enclave, Pan No. Aadcg8593L New Delh1100 29 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, SR. DR

Section 4

Revenue for any reason whatsoever, the appellant 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

Shailesh Dattatray Arekar, Gujarat vs. ACIT, Vapi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 38/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.38/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Shailesh Dattatray Arekar Assistant Commissioner Of Income- बनाम/ Daxini Faliya, Sarigam-396 Tax, Vapi, Circle, Fortune Square Ii, Vs. 155 8Th Floor, Above Tbz, Chala, Vapi- 396 191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bjcpa 0781 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Chetan Khakhkhar, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 06/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/03/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bijayananda Pruseth, Am: This Appeal By Assessee Emanates From The Order Dated 28.11.2023 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. This Appeal Came Up Hearing Today (6Th March 2025). 2. The Learned Counsel For The Assessee Submits That The Assessee Has Applied For Seeking The Benefits Of Direct Vivad Se Visvas Scheme -2024 (Dtvsv-24) & His Application Has Been Accepted. The Learned Counsel For The Assessee Further Submits That He May Be Allowed To Withdraw This Appeal. The Assessee Has Also Filed Copy Of Form No. 1 & 2 Of Dvsv-24. Form No.2 Was Issued By The Designated Authority On 26.12.2024. This Fact Was Confronted

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

Income Tax Officer (Exemption) - 4, Nagpur vs. Deendayal Seva Pratishthan, Yavatmal

In the result, appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 572/NAG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 11Section 12Section 138

record. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and having considered order dated 10.01.2022 passed by this Court in Miscellaneous Application No.21/2022 by which the following order was passed and order dated 04.01.2022 passed by this Court in SLP (C) No.17298/2021 in the case ... Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., the impugned order passed by the High Court is unsustainable. The operative portion of the order passed by this Court in Miscellaneous Application No.21/2022 reads as under – “I. The order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent orders dated

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Nagpur vs. Sumeet Rameshchandra Bajoriya, Yavatmal

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee dismissed

ITA 256/NAG/2024[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

declaration filed under DTVsV Scheme, in that event the assessee will be at liberty get these appeals restored in its original position by filing Miscellaneous Applications and recall this consolidated order for hearing on merits. 3 Shri Gaurav Vasant Khandelwal Shri Sagar Vasant Khandelwal ITA no.274–275/Nag./2019

Incom Tax Officer, Ward -2, Akola vs. Shri Sagar Vasant Khandelwal, Akola

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee dismissed

ITA 275/NAG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Akola vs. Shri Gaurav Vasant Khandelwal, Akola

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee dismissed

ITA 274/NAG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Mr. Mahendra Mohiniraj Gandhe, Ahmednagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle, Ahmednagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 413/PUN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.413/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mr.Mahendra Mohiniraj V The Assistant Gandhe, S Commissioner Of Income 270/31, Manisha Banglow, Tax, Ahmednagar Circle, Professor Colony, Ahmednagar. Savedi Road, Ahmednagar – 414003. Pan: Aaypg 2983J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hari Krishan – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr Date Of Hearing 17/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/03/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Pune Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 21.01.2020 For Assessment Year 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

case : 1.1 The present appeal was heard first by ITAT Pune on 28.11.2022 and order was pronounced 23.12.2022. However, Assessee filed a Miscellaneous Application MA No.115/PUN/2023 stating that the Ground No.5 was not adjudicated by ITAT vide order dated 23.12.2022. The Miscellaneous Application was allowed vide order dated

Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldiait, Haldia vs. H Port Emp Co Socy Limited, Haldia - East Midnapore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1455/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 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

Samvardhana Motherson International Ltd(Now Amalgamated With Motherson Sumi Systems Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle22(2) New Delhi, New Delhi

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

ITA 1951/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Samvardhana Motherson Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of International Ltd. (Now Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Amalgamated Withmotherson Gurgaon Sumi Systems Ltd.) F-7 Block B-1 2Nd Floor, Mohan Co-Operative Inds. Estates, Mathura Road, New Delhi-1100 44 Pan No. Aaics6115R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Kashish Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, SR. DR

Section 4

General Motors Technical Centre India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon

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

ITA 9656/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 General Motors Technical Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Centre India Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Office No.4-109B, 4-110, 4- Gurgaon 103, 4Th Floor, Blue One Square, 246, Phase Iv,Udyog Vihar, Gurugram, Haryana Pin 122016 Pan No. Aadcb7663C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Kashish Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, SR. DR

Section 4

M/S Bt E-Serv (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 99/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.99/Del/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2011-12 बनाम Bt E-Serve (India) Pvt. Ltd., Ito, 11Th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Vs. Ward 5(2), Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aadcb2533M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

common order dated 30/10/2017 along with appeal in ITA No.565/Del/2015 for the AY 2010-11. However, the assessee filed a miscellaneous application in MA No.279/Del/2018 in ITA No.99/Del/2016 for the assessment year under consideration i.e. AY 2011-12 pointing out 1 certain defects in the order passed by the Tribunal ... dated 30/10/2017. The Tribunal after considering the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee vie order dated 03/12/2021 recalled its order in ITA No.99/Del/2016 for AY 2011-12 dated 30/10/2017 for the limited purpose of adjudicating one of the comparables (Infosys BPO Ltd.) which was inadvertently overlooked while passing the order

Shaikh Izharul Haque Siddique, Bihar vs. ITO, Siwan

In the result, this appeal is dismissed, having been withdrawn

ITA 450/PAT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Section 250

same. However, as requested by the appellant in letter dated 21.01.2025, he would be at liberty to get this appeal revived through a miscellaneous application, in case, for whatever reasons, he does not succeed for a final settlement under the DTVSV Scheme, 2024. 3. In the result, this appeal

Gyanchand Nemichand Jain, Secunderabad vs. ACIT., Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 956/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA K A Sai Prasad And Assessee Party-in-PersonFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Department under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2024, for whatsoever may be the reason, then, the assessee shall be at liberty to file Miscellaneous Application before the Tribunal within the time limit prescribed under the Act to reinstate assessee's appeal. Ordered accordingly. 4 ITA.Nos.856 & 956/Hyd./2024

Gyanchand Nemichand Jain, West Maredpally, Secunderabad vs. ACIT., Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 856/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA A. Srinivas appeared forFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Schneider Electric It Business India Private Limited(Formerly Known As American Power Conversion (India) Pvt Ltd.), Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Large Tax Payers, Bangalore

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

ITA 2002/BANG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Guru Prasad BL, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 250Section 263

covid period. As such, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation (Miscellaneous Application No. 665/2021 in SMW(C) No. 3/2020), provided a blanket extension of limitation periods for all judicial, quasi-judicial, and administrative proceedings due to COVID

Shri. Rajesh M. Trivedi, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-2, Thane

In the result, the appeals filed by both the assessees are allowed

ITA 2141/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan: A.Y : 2013-14 Mukesh M. Trivedi Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income B-205, Meri Gold Ram Mandir Tax, Central Circle – 2, Road, Vazira Naka, Borivali (W), Thane. (Respondent) Mumbai 400 092. Pan : Aacpt0784C (Appellant) : A.Y : 2013-14 Rajesh M. Trivedi Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income B-205, Meri Gold Ram Mandir Tax, Central Circle – 2, Road, Vazira Naka, Borivali (W), Thane. (Respondent) Mumbai 400 092. Pan : Abxpt5347F (Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms. Ridhisha JainFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

also disposed of by the co-ordinate bench earlier by an ex-parte order dated 07-02-2023. Subsequently, both the assessees filed miscellaneous applications seeking recall of the order passed in their appeals ex-parte. The miscellaneous application filed by Shri Rajesh M Trivedi was numbered ... No.413/Mum/2023 and the earlier order was recalled in the order dated 30-08-2023 passed against the above said miscellaneous application. The miscellaneous application filed by Shri Mukesh M Trivedi was numbered as M A No.412/Mum/2023 and the earlier order was recalled in the order dated 27-10-2023 passed

Shri Mukesh M.Trivedi, Mumbai vs. Dy.Comm of Incom Tax-Central Circle -2, Thane

In the result, the appeals filed by both the assessees are allowed

ITA 1955/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Ms. Ridhisha JainFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

Subodh Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-62(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1742/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआअसं.1742/िद"ी/2018(िन.व. 2014-15) Subodh Gupta, D-3, East Jyoti Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi 110093 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aevpg-4646-M बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Ward 14(3), C.R Building, Delhi 110002 Assessee By : None Department By : Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 18/03/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 18/03/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 20, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 28.02.2018, For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Filed An Application Dated 31.01.2025 Stating That The Assessee Has Settled The Dispute In Appeal Under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024 (In Short ‘Vsvs’) & Furnished A Copy Of Form No. 1 Along With Application. The Assessee Thus, Prayed For Withdrawal Of Appeal.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, 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. [Re. M/s. Nannusamy Mohan

C.L.Agarwal Charitable Trust, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(1)Exemption, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 904/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 904/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 C.L. Agarwal Charitable Trust,…...………Appellant 11A/1, Sunny Park, Ballygunge, Kolkata-700019 [Pan:Aaatc2106R] -Vs.- Assistant Director Of Income Tax,.……...Respondent Centralized Processing Centre

Section 91

case, I 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. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order