Rectification u/s 254 - A binding decision is always ...

Court Ruling u/s 254: Judicial Decisions Are Retrospective, Correcting Prior Legal Interpretation Errors.

April 1, 2019

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Rectification u/s 254 - A binding decision is always retrospective - When a court decides a matter it only interprets law and applies it to the facts of the case. any interpretation of law contrary to subsequent judicial pronouncement it is a mistake apparent from record.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Rectification u/s 254 - A binding decision is always ...

Court Ruling u/s 254: Judicial Decisions Are Retrospective, Correcting Prior Legal Interpretation Errors.

April 1, 2019

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Rectification application u/s 254 - Tribunal not followed the decision on the identical facts by the Coordinate Bench which is confirmed by this Court - The Court...

Legality of revision of order of Tribunal u/s 254 on ground of retrospective overruling - Judicial decision acts retrospectively. Judges do not make law they only...

Disallowance of prior period expenses pertaining to expenditure crystallized or details received after completion of earlier years' audits. Genuineness not doubted,...

The adjudicating authority is bound to explain the alleged contraventions to the person proceeded against or their legal representatives. Rule 4(4) mandates...

Rectification u/s 254 - non-consideration of decision of tribunal relied upon by the assessee on identical fact - decision subsequently approved by Hon’ble Bombay High...

The High Court addressed the issue of extending stay beyond 365 days by ITAT under the third proviso to Section 254(2A) with the 2008 Finance Act amendment. The...

Money Laundering - Scheduled offences - whether the Non-Bailable Warrants (NBW) issued against the petitioner are liable to be quashed? - The High Court affirmed the...

Doctrine of Merger of High Court Decision with the Order of Supreme Court - The Jharkhand High Court, in its analysis, delved into the doctrine of merger, a pivotal...

HC determined the ITAT's decision to remand the matter to CIT(A) was improper when the issue was purely legal under Rule 27. Given ITAT had acknowledged the legal nature...

The decision of the High Court or the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered prior to or even subsequent to the order, will constitute mistake apparent from the record within...

The High Court held that the impugned Press Release by the Ministry of Finance, purporting to direct judicial and quasi-judicial authorities to classify all...

HC determined that Notification No. 54/2018-Central Tax amending Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules operates prospectively from October 9, 2018, not retrospectively from October...

The High Court addressed the issue of Tax Deducted at Source u/s 195 and addition u/s 40(a)(ia) for payments made to non-residents. The court examined the scope of...

Rectification u/s 254 - The High Court acknowledges that the Tribunal is the final authority to ascertain facts. However, it must rectify any apparent mistakes in its...

The High Court considered a case involving the effect of a retrospective amendment in Section 50 of the CGST Act, 2017 by the Finance Act, 2021. The petition was...

Quick Updates: