https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773833 HC ruled that appellant's omission to claim investment profit deduction in ITR was not rectifiable under Section 154 as mistake was not apparent on record. Court held correct remedy was filing revised return or seeking revision under Section 264. Despite digital filing deadline expiry, HC permitted physical filing of revised returns after Revenue conceded such filing could be accepted by CPC AO. Court directed CPC AO to accept and consider appellant's manually filed revised returns, balancing procedural requirements with taxpayer's substantive right to correct genuine mistakes. en-us Thu, 26 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:31:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773833 HC ruled that appellant's omission to claim investment profit deduction in ITR was not rectifiable under Section 154 as mistake was not apparent on record. Court held correct remedy was filing revised return or seeking revision under Section 264. Despite digital filing deadline expiry, HC permitted physical filing of revised returns after Revenue conceded such filing could be accepted by CPC AO. Court directed CPC AO to accept and consider appellant's manually filed revised returns, balancing procedural requirements with taxpayer's substantive right to correct genuine mistakes. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 26 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773833