https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459301 The ITAT dismissed the assessee's rectification application under section 254(2). The assessee claimed their counsel withdrew Ground No. 1 without authority and was unaware of favorable precedent regarding sections 148 vs 153C. The ITAT held that the counsel had full authority to withdraw grounds based on the letter of authorization, which included compounding powers and made counsel's statements binding on the assessee. The tribunal found contradictions in the assessee's claims and ruled that allowing such rectifications would create dangerous precedent enabling parties to strategically withdraw grounds then seek rectification if other grounds fail. en-us Thu, 30 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Dec 2024 19:39:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459301 The ITAT dismissed the assessee's rectification application under section 254(2). The assessee claimed their counsel withdrew Ground No. 1 without authority and was unaware of favorable precedent regarding sections 148 vs 153C. The ITAT held that the counsel had full authority to withdraw grounds based on the letter of authorization, which included compounding powers and made counsel's statements binding on the assessee. The tribunal found contradictions in the assessee's claims and ruled that allowing such rectifications would create dangerous precedent enabling parties to strategically withdraw grounds then seek rectification if other grounds fail. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 30 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459301