<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (9) TMI 1319 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778830</link>
    <description>AO&#039;s disallowance of deduction for belated employee provident fund/ESI deposits was upheld; HC held ITAT erred in invoking s.254(2) to rectify its earlier order based solely on a subsequent SC ruling. Section 254(2) permits correction of mistakes apparent on record as of the original order date, not changes in law thereafter. HC, following its Division Bench precedents, quashed the Tribunal&#039;s s.254(2) order and allowed the petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2025 08:29:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=853792" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 1319 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778830</link>
      <description>AO&#039;s disallowance of deduction for belated employee provident fund/ESI deposits was upheld; HC held ITAT erred in invoking s.254(2) to rectify its earlier order based solely on a subsequent SC ruling. Section 254(2) permits correction of mistakes apparent on record as of the original order date, not changes in law thereafter. HC, following its Division Bench precedents, quashed the Tribunal&#039;s s.254(2) order and allowed the petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778830</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>