https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93742 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. en-us Fri, 31 Oct 2025 08:23:13 +0530 Fri, 31 Oct 2025 08:23:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93742 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. Highlights Income Tax Fri, 31 Oct 2025 08:23:13 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93742