← 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

Sun Combine, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, CC-1, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 173/CHNY/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri A. Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT
Section 153ASection 271Section 271A

four appeals. The Ld.AR for the assessee stated that the delay was due to Covid-19 pandemic and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 vide order dated 23.03.2020 has given directions that the delay are to be condoned during this period ... they have condoned the delay up to 28.02.2022 in Miscellaneous Application No.21 of 2022 vide order dated 10.01.2022. In term of the directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we condone the delay in filing of these appeals by assessee and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA No.170 & 172/CHNY/2021

Sun Combine, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, CC-1, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 172/CHNY/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri A. Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT
Section 153ASection 271Section 271A

four appeals. The Ld.AR for the assessee stated that the delay was due to Covid-19 pandemic and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 vide order dated 23.03.2020 has given directions that the delay are to be condoned during this period ... they have condoned the delay up to 28.02.2022 in Miscellaneous Application No.21 of 2022 vide order dated 10.01.2022. In term of the directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we condone the delay in filing of these appeals by assessee and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA No.170 & 172/CHNY/2021

Sun Combine, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, CC-1, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 171/CHNY/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri A. Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT
Section 153ASection 271Section 271A

four appeals. The Ld.AR for the assessee stated that the delay was due to Covid-19 pandemic and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 vide order dated 23.03.2020 has given directions that the delay are to be condoned during this period ... they have condoned the delay up to 28.02.2022 in Miscellaneous Application No.21 of 2022 vide order dated 10.01.2022. In term of the directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we condone the delay in filing of these appeals by assessee and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA No.170 & 172/CHNY/2021

Sun Combine, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, CC-1, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 170/CHNY/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri A. Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT
Section 153ASection 271Section 271A

four appeals. The Ld.AR for the assessee stated that the delay was due to Covid-19 pandemic and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 vide order dated 23.03.2020 has given directions that the delay are to be condoned during this period ... they have condoned the delay up to 28.02.2022 in Miscellaneous Application No.21 of 2022 vide order dated 10.01.2022. In term of the directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we condone the delay in filing of these appeals by assessee and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA No.170 & 172/CHNY/2021

All India Chess Federatiion, Chennai vs. ITO Exemptions Ward 1, Chennai

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

ITA 263/CHNY/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar & I. DineshFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar,JCIT
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 154

given by the AO. The ld.counsel for the assessee in these circumstances prayed that the assessee was availing alternative remedy and assessee also filed miscellaneous application before CIT(A) to direct the AO to modify the order dated 06.03.2020 but till date, the application u/s.154

All India Chess Federatiion, Chennai vs. ITO Exemptions Ward 1, Chennai

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

ITA 262/CHNY/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar & I. DineshFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar,JCIT
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 154

given by the AO. The ld.counsel for the assessee in these circumstances prayed that the assessee was availing alternative remedy and assessee also filed miscellaneous application before CIT(A) to direct the AO to modify the order dated 06.03.2020 but till date, the application u/s.154

Ishardas Aggarwal & Sons, Mumbai vs. ITO - 17 (2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5672/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S Ishardas Aggarwal & Vs. Ito – 17(2)(1) Sons 123B, 1St Floor, 39, Latif House, Sant Aayakar Bhavan, Tukaram Road, Iron New Marine Lines, Market, Mumbai – 40009 Mumbai – 400020. Pan/Gir No. : Aabf12423E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya.Ar Respondent By : Shri R.P.Veena.Dr Date Of Hearing 25.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 56, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya.ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P.Veena.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 3

revenue it was ex-parte dismissed. Whereas, the revenue aggrieved by the ITAT order passed in the assessee’s appeal has filed a Miscellaneous application(M.A) seeking recall of the M/s Ishardas Aggarwal & Sons, Mumbai. Honble Tribunal order passed in the assessee appeal.The Honble Tribunal in the M.A. has recalled

DCIT CC-8(4), Mumbai vs. Kalyanji Velji HUF, Mumbai

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

ITA 2337/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit Cent. Circle-8(4), M/S Kalyanji Velji Huf Room No. 659, 6Th Floor, Plot No. 368, Vishrani Niwas, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Bhandarkar Road, Matunga C.R. Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400019. Pan No. Aaahk 1097 D Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Jasdeep Singh, Cit-Dr Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 30/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Jasdeep Singh, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 48

delay is covered he period of the delay is covered by the decision of by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application

G.D. Shah Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (E), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1398/MUM/2022[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2022AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2022-23 G.D. Shah Charitable Trust, The Commissioner Of Income Tax 372, A & B, Deep Ashish, 9Th (Exemption), Road, Shantabai Ambre Marg, Vs. Mumbai. Chembur, Mumbai-400071. Pan No. Aabtg 1766 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Sumit Mantri Revenue By : Mr. Kailash Kanojia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Sumit MantriFor Respondent: Mr. Kailash Kanojia, CIT-DR
Section 12A

order of the Hon’ble Supreme red by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme G.D. Shah Charitable Trust G.D. 3 Court in Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 in SMW(C) Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 in SMW(C) Miscellaneous Application

Thermo Fisher Scientific India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the three additional grounds mentioned above are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2701/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
Section 43(6)(c)

assessee relating to AY 2009-10 was earlier disposed of by the Tribunal on 28-06-2019. Subsequently, the assessee moved a miscellaneous application contending that the grounds urged by way of additional grounds have not been disposed of by the Tribunal. Finding merit in the said application, the Tribunal

Wns Global; Services Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Circle- 14 (3)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 295/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Cross Objection No. 52/Mum/2020 (Arising In Ita No. 2383/Mum/2019 For A.Y. 10-11)

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Tejandra Pal Singh, DR

assessee itself for [1] assessment year 2004 – 05 in ITA number 1886/ M/2009, [2] for assessment year 2005 – 06 in ITA number 631 – 2011, miscellaneous application 261 – 2019, [3] for assessment year ITA Nos. 295/M/2020 & CO No.52/M/2020, 2383/M/2019 WNS Global Services P. Ltd; A.Ys

DCIT-14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Wns Global Services Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2383/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Cross Objection No. 52/Mum/2020 (Arising In Ita No. 2383/Mum/2019 For A.Y. 10-11)

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Tejandra Pal Singh, DR

assessee itself for [1] assessment year 2004 – 05 in ITA number 1886/ M/2009, [2] for assessment year 2005 – 06 in ITA number 631 – 2011, miscellaneous application 261 – 2019, [3] for assessment year ITA Nos. 295/M/2020 & CO No.52/M/2020, 2383/M/2019 WNS Global Services P. Ltd; A.Ys

DCIT 1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 1369/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: The Tribunal. The Ld D.R, On The Contrary, Submitted That The Present Appeal Will Be Covered By The Exception Provided In The Circular As Amended By Circular Dated 20Th August, 2018. He Submitted That Clause (E) Of Paragraph 10 (As Amended) Shall Apply To The Facts Of Present Case & The Said Clause (E) Reads As Under:-

Section 68

cogent reasons/evidences that these appeals are covered under exceptions carved out in aforesaid CBDT circular, the Revenue is hereby granted liberty to file miscellaneous application(s) praying for recall of these orders in accordance with law. We order accordingly. 4. In the result, all the three appeals filed

Nitin Parkash, Thane vs. DCIT Cir 3, Thane

ITA 1540/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 817/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं. 1540/मुं/2018 ("न.व. 2011-12) Mr. Nitin Parkash , 221/222, Swasstik Plaza, Pokhran Road No.2, Subhash Nagar, Thane (W) – 400 601 Pan: Aaspp-1411-G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle- 3, Thane. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Akash Kumar ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Tharian Oommen& Shri B.K.Bagchi सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 27/05/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 22/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.817/Mum/2015 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Thane [In Short ‘The Cit(A)] Dated 01/01/2015 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. This Appeal Is In The Second Round Before The Tribunal. Earlier This Appeal Of The Assessee Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 19/03/2018. Thereafter, The Assessee Filed Miscellaneous Application, Vide Ma No.271/Mum/2018 Seeking

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal and Akash KumarFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen& Shri B.K.Bagchi
Section 2(14)Section 48

second round before the Tribunal. Earlier this appeal of the assessee was decided by the Tribunal vide order dated 19/03/2018. Thereafter, the assessee filed Miscellaneous Application, vide MA No.271/Mum/2018 seeking 2 आअसं. 1540/मुं/2018 ("न.व. 2011-12) rectification in the order of Tribunal, stating that ground No.2

Nitin Parkash, Thane vs. DCIT Cir 3, Thane

ITA 817/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 817/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं. 1540/मुं/2018 ("न.व. 2011-12) Mr. Nitin Parkash , 221/222, Swasstik Plaza, Pokhran Road No.2, Subhash Nagar, Thane (W) – 400 601 Pan: Aaspp-1411-G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle- 3, Thane. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Akash Kumar ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Tharian Oommen& Shri B.K.Bagchi सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 27/05/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 22/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.817/Mum/2015 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Thane [In Short ‘The Cit(A)] Dated 01/01/2015 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. This Appeal Is In The Second Round Before The Tribunal. Earlier This Appeal Of The Assessee Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 19/03/2018. Thereafter, The Assessee Filed Miscellaneous Application, Vide Ma No.271/Mum/2018 Seeking

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal and Akash KumarFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen& Shri B.K.Bagchi
Section 2(14)Section 48

second round before the Tribunal. Earlier this appeal of the assessee was decided by the Tribunal vide order dated 19/03/2018. Thereafter, the assessee filed Miscellaneous Application, vide MA No.271/Mum/2018 seeking 2 आअसं. 1540/मुं/2018 ("न.व. 2011-12) rectification in the order of Tribunal, stating that ground No.2

M/S Joy Packaging Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 10(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4821/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
Section 271(1)(c)

This appeal was disposed of by the Tribunal initially on 01.12.2021, ex parte, without presence of the assessee. Subsequently the assessee moved a Miscellaneous Application seeking recall of the order and accordingly the Tribunal, vide its order dated 14.7.2022 passed in M.A. No. 304/Mum/2021, recalled the order. 3. None appeared

Nhava Sheva Internaitonal Container Terminal P. Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 2(3), Mumbai

In the result ground relating to the deduction under section 80IA in respect of Rs

ITA 3908/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2022AY 2011-12
Section 80I

B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- This appeal was originally disposed of by the Tribunal on 3.2.2020. Subsequently the assessee filed a Miscellaneous Application numbered as M.A. No. 76/Mum/2021 and the said Miscellaneous Application disposed by the Tribunal on 29.6.2021. Paragraph 8 and 9 of the order passed by the Tribunal in the above ... said Miscellaneous Application is relevant here and the same reads as under:- “8. Another issue raised in M A No.76/Mum/2021 is that there was a claim of deduction u/s 80IA in respect of income from Served from India Script (SFIS) Rs.4,90,000/-. It has further been claimed that ITAT

M/S Global Softtech Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 5 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 214/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
Section 271(1)(c)

deem it fit and appropriate to dismiss these appeals of the assessee as not maintainable with a liberty given to IRP to prefer Miscellaneous Application, if so desired, after the completion of Insolvency Resolution Process, in which event, these appeals shall be restored. 4. In the result, appeals

M/S Global Softtech Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 5 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 213/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2022AY 2013-14
Section 271(1)(c)

deem it fit and appropriate to dismiss these appeals of the assessee as not maintainable with a liberty given to IRP to prefer Miscellaneous Application, if so desired, after the completion of Insolvency Resolution Process, in which event, these appeals shall be restored. 4. In the result, appeals

M/S Global Softtech Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle- 5 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 212/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2022AY 2011-12
Section 271(1)(c)

deem it fit and appropriate to dismiss these appeals of the assessee as not maintainable with a liberty given to IRP to prefer Miscellaneous Application, if so desired, after the completion of Insolvency Resolution Process, in which event, these appeals shall be restored. 4. In the result, appeals