Rom u/s 254 by itat
This query is : Resolved
26 June 2019
Is the limitation period of 6 months relate to filing of MA for rectification of mistake or to the disposal of petition by ITAT?
28 June 2019
Limitation period is for filing of MA for rectification.
29 June 2019
Thank you Sir. Supreme Court and lower courts have also held that the limitation period is for filing MA. But, I have a doubt whether the interpretation of Courts is correct when the Act says that limitation is for the disposal of MA. Please be kind enough to analyse the Statute and offer your personal expert opinion.
"254. Orders of Appellate Tribunal
(2) The Appellate Tribunal may, at any time within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it ......"
"254. Orders of Appellate Tribunal
(2) The Appellate Tribunal may, at any time within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it ......"
22 July 2025
Great question! Let’s analyze Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act and the limitation issue around filing a Miscellaneous Application (MA) for rectification before the ITAT.
Text of Section 254(2):
"The Appellate Tribunal may, at any time within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it."
Key points in the provision:
The phrase “within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed” refers to a time window.
The Tribunal has the power to amend its order within this six-month window for rectifying a mistake apparent from the record.
Interpretation debate:
Does the 6-month period apply to:
Filing the MA by the aggrieved party? OR
Disposal of the MA by the ITAT?
Judicial interpretation:
Supreme Court and various High Courts have held that the 6-month limitation applies to the filing of the MA (i.e., the applicant must file the MA within 6 months from the end of the month when the order was passed).
After filing within 6 months, the Tribunal can dispose of the MA even beyond the 6-month period.
Why this interpretation makes practical sense:
If the 6 months were for disposal of MA, then:
The applicant would have no control over when the MA is decided. The Tribunal could delay disposal and effectively deny the applicant a remedy.
It would defeat the purpose of providing a limited window for correction of mistakes.
Hence, courts have emphasized the importance of filing within 6 months.
My expert view:
Statutory wording focuses on the time “within which the Tribunal may amend the order.”
However, since the Tribunal can amend only if the MA is filed, and the MA is the triggering event, the limitation must logically relate to filing the MA.
This interpretation aligns with the principles of natural justice, procedural fairness, and practical administration of justice.
Summary:
Aspect = Limitation Period
Filing Miscellaneous Application (MA) Within 6 months from end of month when order passed
Disposal of MA by ITAT No fixed limitation under Section 254(2)
Text of Section 254(2):
"The Appellate Tribunal may, at any time within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it."
Key points in the provision:
The phrase “within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed” refers to a time window.
The Tribunal has the power to amend its order within this six-month window for rectifying a mistake apparent from the record.
Interpretation debate:
Does the 6-month period apply to:
Filing the MA by the aggrieved party? OR
Disposal of the MA by the ITAT?
Judicial interpretation:
Supreme Court and various High Courts have held that the 6-month limitation applies to the filing of the MA (i.e., the applicant must file the MA within 6 months from the end of the month when the order was passed).
After filing within 6 months, the Tribunal can dispose of the MA even beyond the 6-month period.
Why this interpretation makes practical sense:
If the 6 months were for disposal of MA, then:
The applicant would have no control over when the MA is decided. The Tribunal could delay disposal and effectively deny the applicant a remedy.
It would defeat the purpose of providing a limited window for correction of mistakes.
Hence, courts have emphasized the importance of filing within 6 months.
My expert view:
Statutory wording focuses on the time “within which the Tribunal may amend the order.”
However, since the Tribunal can amend only if the MA is filed, and the MA is the triggering event, the limitation must logically relate to filing the MA.
This interpretation aligns with the principles of natural justice, procedural fairness, and practical administration of justice.
Summary:
Aspect = Limitation Period
Filing Miscellaneous Application (MA) Within 6 months from end of month when order passed
Disposal of MA by ITAT No fixed limitation under Section 254(2)
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- GSTR 3b related
- Upload Validation error
- Do itr 5 and ITR 3 open
- GST Partners addition
- Non-disclosure of Foreign Shares & Dividend in Past ITRs – How to Rectify & Report Now?
- ICWAI-Final best coaching center for online by English
- "Please ensure that the Total of the Deductions u/s 54F match the same in Table D in Sch CG"
- Refund_ Insufficient in credit ledger
- EPF Withdrawal Where to show in ITR2
- 54 F disallowance presentation in ITR 2
Trending Online Classes
-
Input Tax Credit, GST refunds and Recovery of refunds- Roadblocks and way outs
CA Nipun Arora03 September 2025 -
GST LIVE Certification Course - 43rd Weekdays Batch(With Govt Certificate)
Industry Expert15 September 2025
CAclubindia
