2026 (7) TMI 861

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... argument and stated that the MA was filed with a delay for 120 days. The Ld. AR stated that the original order passed by the ITAT on 25.02.2025 which was received by the assessee on June 2025. Accordingly, the assessee is liable to file the MA by 31.12.2025. The assessee has filed the application on 29.12.2025. Respectfully considering the order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Accost Media LLP vs DCIT (2026) reported in 308 Taxman 411 (Bom.) date of order 01.12.2025 held Where assessee received ITAT's order on 24-3-2025 and filed rectification application on 16-7-2025, limitation of six months for filing such application commenced from date of communication of order and not date of order itself; accordingly, application was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s per the said decision, no adjustment is required to be made to book profits in relation to tax on distributed dividend 9. The Revenue has not produced any decision contrary to the same. 10. The said decision is neither cited, nor distinguished in the impugned order. 11. Hence, non-consideration of decision rendered by Co-ordinate Bench on identical issue would amount to mistake apparent from record. 12. The Applicant also wishes to place reliance on the below judicial precedents (submitted in the paperbook dated 11 February 2026 which upheld that non-consideration of a binding judicial precedent is a mistake apparent from record and deserves rectification under section 254(2) of the Act (Kindly refer to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....x" while ruling against the assessee. 16. Hence, the assessee submits that the said decision is incorrectly distinguished and misread. Hence, the same deserves to be rectified." 6. The Ld. DR argued and respectfully relied on the order of the ITAT Mumbai Bench. 7. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. We find that the tribunal has adopted the order of the ITAT Kolkata in the case of ACIT vs Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. 109 ITD 146. After the said adoption the tribunal had made a mistake and taken a wrong observation from the said order of the Coordinate Bench. We find that the said mistake apparent from the record and accordingly we considering the assessee's submission the Ground N....