Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.363

Section 254(2) falls under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 363 (Orders of Appellate Tribunal) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 363 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 254(2) is CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. (349 ITR 98), cited in 818 of the 902 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 254(2)

CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd.
349 ITR 98 · 2012 · High Court
818
citing judgments

When computing deduction under Section 10A, if communication or telecommunication expenses are excluded from export turnover, they must also be excluded from total turnover to maintain consistency and apply the ordinary meaning of 'turnover' in context.

Sabarkhanta Zilla Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd. v. ClT
203 ITR 1027 · 1993 · Supreme Court
98
citing judgments

Co-operative societies or banks engaged in both agricultural and non-agricultural activities are entitled to deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, limited only to the profits derived from agricultural activities, not 100% of their gross profits.

CIT v. NIIT Ltd.
318 ITR 289 · 2009 · High Court
79
citing judgments

A composite agreement, even if charges are broken down, cannot be dissected to apply Section 194I for TDS on rent when the agreement is a business arrangement for mutual obligations.

CIT v. Chandra Vilas Hotel
164 ITR 102 · 1987 · High Court
41
citing judgments

The assessee bears the onus to establish any claim for deduction of expenditure when computing taxable income, especially when parties from whom purchases were allegedly made deny such transactions before sales tax authorities.

Jagdish Kumar Gulati v. CIT
269 ITR 71 · 2004 · High Court
39
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer (AO) is expected to conduct a detailed inquiry during assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) and should not accept the assessee's claims at face value. A failure to investigate glaring issues amounts to a lack of proper inquiry.

CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.
313 ITR 321 · 2009 · High Court
38
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 are invalid if the Assessing Officer fails to demonstrate the assessee's failure to make a true and full disclosure of material facts necessary for assessment. The reasons recorded for reopening must specifically allege such a failure, and mere absence of an assessment cannot justify reopening beyond four years.

CIT v. Lucas T.V.S. Limited
249 ITR 306 · 2001 · Supreme Court
36
citing judgments

For reopening an assessment, the Assessing Officer must have a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, not merely a reason to suspect. The Assessing Officer needs tangible material to form this belief.

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. Navasari Cotton and Silk Mills Ltd.
135 ITR 546 · 1982 · High Court
27
citing judgments

The assessee bears the onus to prove the genuineness of purchases, especially when suppliers have denied sales, and mere reliance on previous assessment orders is insufficient.

CIT v. Salem Co-Operative Sugar Mills Limited
229 ITR 285 · 1998 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Amounts collected by an assessee under a statutory obligation and directed to be kept in a separate account for a specific purpose, such as a molasses storage fund, do not belong to the assessee and should be excluded from its total income.

Judgments on Section 254(2)

Ganpati Townships Limited, Bathinda vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana

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

ITA 373/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 373/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Ganpati Townships The Dcit, बनाम Limited, Central Circle-1, Hotel Confor Inn Tulip, Ludhiana Vs. Tulip Height, Opp.Rose Garden, Goniana Road, Bhatinda Punjab 151001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaccg4398L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.05.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.05.2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 18.02.2024 Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Ld. Counsel, On Behalf Of The Assessee, Has Filed An Application Dated 17.05.2025 For Withdrawal Of This Appeal On The Ground That The Assessee Has Opted For The 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024’ & Sought Permission Of The Bench To 373-Chd-2024 Ganpati Townships Limited, Bathinda

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 254(2)