Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
Popular Search: list of goods taxed at 4% :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: cpt :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: due date for vat payment :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: VAT Audit :: empanelment :: form 3cd :: TDS :: VAT RATES :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4%
« From the Courts »
 Ambuja Cements Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Service Tax Commissionerate, Delhi
 Director Of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs. Vishwa Hindu Parishad
 ITAT Proposes Important Changes To Tribunal Rules
 Meherjee Cassinath Holdings Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
  CIT vs. Pashupati Nath Agro Food Products Pvt. Ltd (Allahabad High Court)
  Raj Dadarkar & Associates vs. ACIT (Supreme Court)
 CST vs. Sunil Haribhau Pote (Bombay High Court)
 CIT vs. Pashupati Nath Agro Food Products Pvt. Ltd (Allahabad High Court)
 State Of Jharkhand vs. Lalu Prasad Yadav (Supreme Court)
 Raj Dadarkar & Associates vs. ACIT (Supreme Court)
 Hyundai Motor India Limited vs. DCIT (ITAT Chennai)

Rectification of mistake: Powers of Tribunal-Appeal order by High Court
October, 22nd 2007

H.B. Leasing and Finance Co. Ltd. vs CIT
Citation 163 Taxman 143

Rectification of mistake: Powers of Tribunal-Appeal order by High Court

The Tribunal had passed orders under s.254(1). The appeal against said order was dismissed by the High Court on 25 October 2004. Therefore, the assessee moved on application for rectification under s.254(2), which, were heard and dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that there was no apparent error in its order. No question of law arose from Tribunals order. Further, the rectification application filed after dismissal of appeal by the High court was not maintainable.

High Court of Delhi

H.B. Leasing and Finance Co. Ltd. vs CIT

IT Appeal No. 1769 of 2006

Madan B. Lokur and V.B. Gupta, JJ

8 March 2007

Vivek Varma and Santosh K. Aggarwal for the Applicant
P.L. Bansal for the Respondent


1. The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 9-6-2006 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'E' in MA No. 375 (Del.)/05 in ITA No. 3473 (Del.)/98 relevant for the assessment year 1994-95 and MA No. 376 (Del.)/05 in ITA No. 2621 (Del.)/2000 relevant for the assessment year 1996-97.

2. The Tribunal had, on the merits of the case, passed an order dated 14-6-2004 deciding the appeal against the assessee.

3. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal in this Court under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which came to be dismissed on 25-10-2004.

4. Against the decision of this Court, the assessee preferred an appeal, which has been registered in the Supreme Court as Civil Appeal No. 5841/2005.

5. It appears that after the decision of this Court on 25-10-2004, the assessee preferred a miscellaneous application under section 254(2) of the Act before the Tribunal on 30-3-2005 in which it was mentioned that there were certain errors in the order dated 14-6-2004 and that those errors need rectification.

6. The rectification application filed by the assessee was argued and dismissed by the Tribunal by the impugned order dated 9-6-2006. The Tribunal was of the view that there were no errors apparent from the record and that rectification was not possible without re-hearing and re-adjudicating the entire subject-matter of the appeal. In other words, the contents of the application went well beyond the powers conferred on the Tribunal under section 254(2) of the Act.

7. We are of the opinion that on these facts, no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. Moreover, it is seen that the rectification application was filed by the assessee after the decision taken by this Court dismissing the appeal of the assessee under section 260A of the Act.

8. The appeal is dismissed.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2017 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Wholesale Silver Jewelry

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions