← 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

Sp Armada Oil Exploration P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-3(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1352/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Us.

Section 154

Assessing Officer. 4. The matter, however, did not end there. On 16th February 2021, the Transfer Pricing Officer moved a petition, titled 5. “Miscellaneous application on the order of the learned DRP-2 Mumbai in the case of Shapoorji Pallonji Bumi Armada Offshore ... dispose of the rectification petition by stating as follows: 1. The DRP directions in this case were issued on 03.11.2020. The TPO filed miscellaneous application (MA) before the DRP on 16.02.2021through e-mail. A copy of the MA filed by the TPO was forwarded to the assessee through

Income Tax Officer (TDS) 2(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Twinkle Enviro Tech P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 1371/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 201Section 206A

appeal of the assessee as well as the revenue as not maintainable with a liberty given to ld. IRP and Revenue to prefer Miscellaneous Application, if so desired, after the completion of Insolvency Resolution Process, in which event, these appeals shall be restored. 5. In the result, appeals

Twinkle Enviro Tech P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1231/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 201Section 206A

appeal of the assessee as well as the revenue as not maintainable with a liberty given to ld. IRP and Revenue to prefer Miscellaneous Application, if so desired, after the completion of Insolvency Resolution Process, in which event, these appeals shall be restored. 5. In the result, appeals

Elder Health Care Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 34, Mumbai

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

ITA 476/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: This Tribunal By Filing Form No.36. Hence, The Present Appeals In The Present Format Are Not Maintainable & Hence, Liable To Be Dismissed.

Section 14Section 143(3)

deem it fit and appropriate to dismiss these appeals of the assessee as not maintainable with a liberty given to Official Liquidator to prefer Miscellaneous Application, if so desired, after the completion of Insolvency Resolution Process, in which event, this appeal shall be restored. 5. In the result, appeals

Elder Health Care Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 34, Mumbai

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

ITA 475/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: This Tribunal By Filing Form No.36. Hence, The Present Appeals In The Present Format Are Not Maintainable & Hence, Liable To Be Dismissed.

Section 14Section 143(3)

deem it fit and appropriate to dismiss these appeals of the assessee as not maintainable with a liberty given to Official Liquidator to prefer Miscellaneous Application, if so desired, after the completion of Insolvency Resolution Process, in which event, this appeal shall be restored. 5. In the result, appeals

Elder Health Care Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 34, Mumbai

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

ITA 474/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: This Tribunal By Filing Form No.36. Hence, The Present Appeals In The Present Format Are Not Maintainable & Hence, Liable To Be Dismissed.

Section 14Section 143(3)

deem it fit and appropriate to dismiss these appeals of the assessee as not maintainable with a liberty given to Official Liquidator to prefer Miscellaneous Application, if so desired, after the completion of Insolvency Resolution Process, in which event, this appeal shall be restored. 5. In the result, appeals

Elder Health Care Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 34, Mumbai

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

ITA 473/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: This Tribunal By Filing Form No.36. Hence, The Present Appeals In The Present Format Are Not Maintainable & Hence, Liable To Be Dismissed.

Section 14Section 143(3)

deem it fit and appropriate to dismiss these appeals of the assessee as not maintainable with a liberty given to Official Liquidator to prefer Miscellaneous Application, if so desired, after the completion of Insolvency Resolution Process, in which event, this appeal shall be restored. 5. In the result, appeals

Elder Health Care Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 34, Mumbai

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

ITA 472/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: This Tribunal By Filing Form No.36. Hence, The Present Appeals In The Present Format Are Not Maintainable & Hence, Liable To Be Dismissed.

Section 14Section 143(3)

deem it fit and appropriate to dismiss these appeals of the assessee as not maintainable with a liberty given to Official Liquidator to prefer Miscellaneous Application, if so desired, after the completion of Insolvency Resolution Process, in which event, this appeal shall be restored. 5. In the result, appeals

The Acropolis Co .Op. Shg. Soc. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy.CIT CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 284/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Om Prakash Kantआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 284/Mum/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Vishal D. ShahFor Respondent: Shri. Kiran P. Unavekar
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 80Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

global pandemic. The Ld. Counsel submitted that in view of the order dated 10/01/2022 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Miscellaneous Application No. 21 of 2022 in Suo- moto writ petition No. 3 of 2020, where limitation would have expired during the period between 15/03/2020 till

Emerson Network Power (India) P.Ltd, Thane vs. Addl CIT RG 1, Thane

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1771/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2022AY 2010-11
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Para 4 (Pg No.5), etc. 6.11. Attention is also invited to the decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of a Miscellaneous Application filed by the Department against the decision of Hon'ble Tribunal in case of Tata Communication Ltd vs. Addnl. CIT (ITA No. 7071/Mum/2005) wherein

Emerson Network Power (India) P. Ltd, Thane vs. JCIT RG 1, Thane

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1975/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2022AY 2009-10
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Para 4 (Pg No.5), etc. 6.11. Attention is also invited to the decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of a Miscellaneous Application filed by the Department against the decision of Hon'ble Tribunal in case of Tata Communication Ltd vs. Addnl. CIT (ITA No. 7071/Mum/2005) wherein

Upal Developers P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr CIT-8, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the asses

ITA 871/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Upal Developers Private Limited, Principal Commissioner Of Market City Resources Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax-8, Second Floor, R.R. Hosiery Bldg. Vs. Mumbai. Shree Laxmi Woolen Mills Estate, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacu 7953 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

Supreme submitted that delay is covered by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in suo moto motion motion Miscellaneous Application No. 665/2021 pplication No. 665/2021 and hence appeal might be admitted. We find that appeal has been and hence appeal might be admitted. We find that appeal

Vama Pvt Ltd. ( Formerly Known As Vama Department Store Pvt Ltd), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle-5 (3), Mumbai

In the result, Miscellaneous Application stands allowed as above in as much as ITA No

ITA 7387/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 7387/Mum/2019 & Vama Departmental Vs. Acit, Circle – 5(3) Store Pvt Ltd., Room No. 573, 5Th (Now Known As Vama Floor, Aayakar Pvt Ltd.) Bhavan, Mk Road, Kanchanjunga, 72, Mumbai – 400020. Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400026. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacv1262E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Prakash Jotwani & Ms.Yasmin Carnac.Ar Respondent By : Mr.S.N Kabra.Dr Date Of Hearing 02.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 & 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr.Prakash Jotwani &For Respondent: Mr.S.N Kabra.DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 234A

file of the CIT(A) and some of the appeals are treated as infrutuous because of duplicate appeals. Subsequently the assessee has filed Miscellaneous application (MA) in relation to ITA No. 7387/Mum/2019 referred at Para 13 of the ITAT order which state that “it has brought to our notice that ... back. We find the Hon’ble Tribunal in MA 53/Mum/2022 in ITA No. 7387/Mum/2019 A.Y 2011-12 dated 04.04.2022 has observed as under: This Miscellaneous Application by the assessee is arising out of a common order of the ITAT dated 4.2.2022 which includes ITA No. 7387/Mum/2019

ITO 3(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Venkatesh Securities Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1949/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Us Is As Under:

For Appellant: Shri A K TribrewalFor Respondent: Shri S N Kabra
Section 115BSection 14Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 68Section 71

present appeal was disposed off by the Assessment Year: 2007-08 Tribunal vide order, dated 27.08.2019, however, pursuant to the miscellaneous applications filed by the Appellant/Revenue (MA No. 126/Mum/2020), the order dated 27.08.2019 was recalled, vide order dated 02.12.2021, for the limited purpose of adjudication of Ground No. 3 pertaining

Ametek Instruments India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 432/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.432/Bang/2021 : Asst.Year 2016-2017 M/S. Ametek Instruments India The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited Of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1)(1) V. Benguluru. Plot No.1, Epip Industrial Area, Divyashree Nr Enclave, 4Th Floor Block A, Whitefield Bengaluru – 560 066. Pan : Aahca2869B. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT -DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

days from the date of receipt of the final assessment order. However, we notice that the Hon’ble Apex Court vide its judgment in Miscellaneous Application No.665/2021 dated 23.09.2021, due to the pandemic situation had excluded the period from 15th March, 2020 to 2nd October

M/S. Console Components (India ) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, miscellaneous application is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 41/MUM/2022[2014-15 QUARTER 4]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022

appeal, and direct the registry to post the appeal for hearing on merits in the month of July 2022. 4. In the result, miscellaneous application is allowed in the terms indicated above. Pronouncement in the open court today on the 30th May, 2022. Sandeep Singh Karhail Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member

The Jt. Comm of Income Tax (OSD) Cent .Cir-6(4), Mumbai vs. M/S D''Decor Properties LLP, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1743/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: This Extended Date, Accordingly, We Hold That There Is No Delay In Filing Of Appeal By The Revenue.

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

outset the appeal filed by the Revenue is barred by limitation by 40 days. We find that the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 in SMW(C) No.3 of 2020 dated 23/09/2021 had ordered that the period of limitation for any suit, appeal, application or proceeding ... necessary. Last date for filing second appeal is extended until further orders, as per the Hon'ble Supreme Court's order dated 08.03.2021 in Miscellaneous Application No.665/2021 to Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020. 3.1. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record

ACIT 22 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Rukhana Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6509/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Us.

Section 143(3)Section 68

appeals do not fall within the ambit of low tax effect circular issued by CBDT, liberty shall be given to the Revenue to file Miscellaneous Application for restoration of these appeals. 6. In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court

ACIT 22 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Rukhana Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6507/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Us.

Section 143(3)Section 68

appeals do not fall within the ambit of low tax effect circular issued by CBDT, liberty shall be given to the Revenue to file Miscellaneous Application for restoration of these appeals. 6. In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court

ACIT 22 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Rukhana Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6506/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Us.

Section 143(3)Section 68

appeals do not fall within the ambit of low tax effect circular issued by CBDT, liberty shall be given to the Revenue to file Miscellaneous Application for restoration of these appeals. 6. In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court