Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25 (0.29 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 154 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Humboldt Wedag India Pvt. Ltd., New ... vs Acit, New Delhi on 11 June, 2018
11. We observe that in the case of ACIT Vs. Humboldt Wedag Pvt.
Ltd. (supra) the coordinate bench of Delhi Tribunal held that it is
obligatory under the statute to issue notice by the tax authorities
and give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee
and this is clearly set out under 154 of the Act. If this procedure of
issuing notice and giving reasonable opportunity of being heard is
not followed any further exercise will be nonest and the order itself
becomes void ab initio. While holding so the Tribunal observed as
under: -
Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Aimil Limited on 25 January, 2005
14. The order of the CPC passed u/s 154 is also not sustainable for
one more reason. We observed that as on the date of passing the
order u/s 154 dated 15/06/2019 there were divergent views on the
issue of disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act which were paid
before due date u/s 139(1) of the Act. As on the date of passing
rectification order i.e. 15.06.2019 the jurisdictional High Court in
the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. (supra) was in favour of the assessee,
wherein the Hon'ble High Court held that the contributions to
PF/ESI paid before the due date u/s 139(1) of the Act are allowable
as deduction. Therefore, the issue of disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of
the Act stands decided in favour of the assessee as on the date of
passing of the rectification order u/s 154 of the Act. Therefore, the
adjustment made by CPC disallowing PF/ESI contributions by way of
rectification u/s 154 of the Act cannot be said to be a mistake
apparent on record as contemplated u/s 154 of the Act. Therefore,
for this reason also the order passed u/s 154 of the Act disallowing
PF/ESI contributions by way of rectification u/s 154 of the Act
cannot be sustained.
Section 36 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
M/S Svr Neuro & Traumo Super Speciality ... vs The Dcit,, Vijayawada on 29 November, 2017
12. The Hon'ble High Court of Telangana in its recent decision
delivered on 07/03/2024, in the case of Apollo Specialty Hospitals
Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra) considered an identical issue and held
that rectification order passed u/s 154 of the Act disallowing carry
8
I.T.A.No.87/Del/2024
forward loss without providing any opportunity of hearing being
provided to the assessee is in violation of statutory provisions of
section 154(3) of the Act and, therefore, such order is un-
sustainable in law. While holding so the Hon'ble High Court held as
under: