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:

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...

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...

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...

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...

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...

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 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...

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

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...

Judicial propriety - it is judicially correct to follow the decisions of Hon’ble High Courts, which are in favour of the assessee; despite there being decisions contrary...

Judicial Discipline - Seeking refund of accumulated Cenvat credit - input services or not - The department had not accepted the judgement in the case of Paul Merchants...

Quick Updates: