Summary: Accost Media LLP took legal action against the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax in Mumbai, arguing that their request to correct a mistake was wrongly dismissed as being too late. The Bombay High Court agreed with Accost Media, saying their request was submitted on time.
Accost Media LLP brought their case to the Bombay High Court, challenging a decision from October 13, 2025. They wanted this decision, which turned down their request to fix an error under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, to be reversed.
The main question was whether Accost Media's request was submitted too late. The original decision they wanted to change was from December 10, 2024, but they only got it on March 24, 2025. They asked for a correction on July 16, 2025. The court had to figure out if this was within the allowed time.
"It is impossible for the Applicant to approach the Tribunal under Section 254(2) without being supplied a copy of the order."
The court, led by Judges B. P. Colabawalla and Amit S. Jamsandekar, agreed with Accost Media. They decided that the time limit should start from when the order was received, not when it was made. This matches decisions in similar cases from the Delhi High Court.
The judges mentioned decisions from the Delhi High Court, like Golden Times Services (P) Ltd and Pacific Projects Ltd, which supported the idea that the countdown starts when the order is received.
"The ITAT has not applied its mind on this aspect and has been swayed by the literal and mechanical construction..."
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had based its decision on another case, Leena Power Tech Engineers (P) Ltd, but the court found this unrelated. That case was about how the Supreme Court's decision on time limits was affected by COVID-19.
The court decided not to send the case back to the ITAT. Instead, Accost Media can continue to argue their case in an ongoing appeal against the original decision from December 2024. The court confirmed that Accost Media's request was not late, and their rights were protected.
"The Writ Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs."
This ruling shows how important it is to know when legal time limits start, especially when it comes to receiving official documents.
