https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763908 The Bombay HC held that the Tribunal erred in exercising jurisdiction under Section 254(2) for rectification regarding delayed payment of statutory dues like Provident Fund and ESIC amounts. The Revenue sought rectification of the Tribunal's order setting aside additions made by the assessing officer, citing the subsequent SC decision in Checkmate Services Private Limited. The HC agreed with the Tribunal's decision in ANI Integrated Services Ltd, which rejected similar Revenue applications, and concluded the Tribunal was in patent error in exercising rectification jurisdiction under Section 254(2). en-us Tue, 03 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Jun 2025 14:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763908 The Bombay HC held that the Tribunal erred in exercising jurisdiction under Section 254(2) for rectification regarding delayed payment of statutory dues like Provident Fund and ESIC amounts. The Revenue sought rectification of the Tribunal's order setting aside additions made by the assessing officer, citing the subsequent SC decision in Checkmate Services Private Limited. The HC agreed with the Tribunal's decision in ANI Integrated Services Ltd, which rejected similar Revenue applications, and concluded the Tribunal was in patent error in exercising rectification jurisdiction under Section 254(2). Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 03 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763908