Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Assessee's project-completion revenue recognition upheld; income addition deleted under Guidance Note/AS-9 and percentage-completion rules as complian...
The HC dismissed rectification under Section 254(2) sought to alter an ITAT order which had deleted a disallowance made in an intimation under Section 143(1) where the Assessee's belated deposit of employees' PF/ESI had been disallowed under Section 36(1)(va). The court held that a subsequent SC pronouncement cannot constitute a mistake apparent on the record for purposes of Section 254(2). Because the ITAT's original order conformed to the law as it existed when rendered, no error apparent on the face of the record existed to permit rectification; therefore the rectification invocation was barred.
The HC dismissed rectification under Section 254(2) sought to alter an ITAT order which had deleted a disallowance made in an intimation under Section 143(1) where the Assessee's belated deposit of employees' PF/ESI had been disallowed under Section 36(1)(va). The court held that a subsequent SC pronouncement cannot constitute a mistake apparent on the record for purposes of Section 254(2). Because the ITAT's original order conformed to the law as it existed when rendered, no error apparent on the face of the record existed to permit rectification; therefore the rectification invocation was barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
