Sub-section (1) lets an income-tax authority referred to in section 236 amend, to rectify a mistake apparent from the record, an order passed by it, an intimation or deemed intimation under section 270(1), or an intimation under section 399. Sub-section (2) permits amendment of any matter other than one considered and decided in appeal or revision. Sub-section (3) makes the power discretionary when exercised suo motu but mandatory where the mistake is brought to notice by the assessee, deductor or collector, or by the Assessing Officer where the authority is the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or Commissioner (Appeals). Sub-section (4) forbids any amendment that enhances an assessment, reduces a refund or otherwise increases liability without notice of intention and a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Sub-section (5) requires a written order. Sub-section (6) requires the Assessing Officer to make any consequent refund, and sub-section (7) requires a notice of demand, deemed issued under section 289, where liability increases. Sub-section (8) bars amendment after four years from the end of the financial year in which the order or intimation was passed, except as provided in section 288, and sub-section (9) requires an order allowing or refusing an application to be passed within six months from the end of the month in which it was received.
Why it is there
It gives a way of correcting obvious errors without an appeal, on either side's initiative, while protecting the assessee from a silent increase in liability. The two time limits balance that: four years for the record to be reopened at all, and six months for the authority to answer an application.
Who it applies to
An income-tax authority referred to in section 236
An assessee, deductor or collector applying for rectification
The Assessing Officer, including as applicant before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or Commissioner (Appeals)
The Joint Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals)
The figures, and what each one turns on
Read the condition in the same row. A figure quoted without it is a wrong answer with a citation attached.
What
Figure
The condition on it
Where
Outer limit for making an amendment
4 years
From the end of the financial year in which the order or intimation sought to be amended was passed; subject to the exception in section 288
Sub-section (8)
Time for the authority to dispose of a rectification application
6 months
From the end of the month in which the application is received from the assessee, deductor or collector; the order may either make the amendment or refuse the claim
Sub-section (9)
What this means in practice
Two clocks run and they are measured differently: the four-year limit in sub-section (8) runs from the end of the financial year of the order being rectified, while the six-month limit in sub-section (9) runs from the end of the month your application is received — and sub-section (9) is expressly subject to sub-section (8), so an application made late in the four-year window does not extend it. If the authority proposes to increase your liability it must first give notice of that intention and a hearing; an order that enhances without both is made without the sub-section (4) safeguard. A matter already considered and decided in appeal or revision is outside the power altogether, though the rest of the order is not.
An example
Illustrative only, and invented for this page. The figures are chosen to show the rule biting, not taken from any real matter.
An intimation under section 270(1) is passed on 12 August 2026, which falls in the financial year ending 31 March 2027, so sub-section (8) allows no amendment after 31 March 2031. The assessee spots an apparent mistake and applies on 1 January 2031. Sub-section (9) would give the authority six months from the end of January 2031, to 31 July 2031 — but it opens with 'Subject to sub-section (8)', so the power dies on 31 March 2031 and a late application does not buy extra time. If the rectification would instead enhance the assessment or reduce a refund, the authority cannot pass it without first giving notice of that intention and a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Where you meet this section
In a rectification application made to the authority that passed the order or intimation, and in the order it must pass in writing either making the amendment or refusing the claim. Where the amendment reduces liability the Assessing Officer makes the refund; where it increases liability he serves a notice of demand in the prescribed form, deemed issued under section 289.
The words themselves
No amendment under this section, except as provided in section 288, shall be made after four years from the end of the financial year in which the order or intimation sought to be amended was passed.
Section section 287(8), Income-tax Act, 2025.
What people get wrong
Measuring the four years from the assessment year or from the date of the mistake. Sub-section (8) runs it from the end of the financial year in which the order or intimation was passed.
Assuming the six-month period gives extra time. Sub-section (9) is expressly subject to sub-section (8), which caps the whole exercise at four years.
Seeking rectification of a matter decided in appeal or revision — sub-section (2) excludes it, even though other matters in the same order remain open.
Treating the authority's power as always discretionary. Sub-section (3)(b) makes amendment mandatory where the mistake is brought to its notice by the assessee, deductor, collector or, in appellate cases, the Assessing Officer.
What this replaced
The correspondence is the Income Tax Department’s own, from its comparison utility for the 1961 and 2025 Acts. A renumbering is the easy half; whether the words changed is the half that decides cases.
Rules of the Income-tax Rules, 2026 that work section 287. Where the rule’s own heading names the section we say so; the rest are marked on reading the rule, which is our derivation and not the department’s. A rule that serves the section silently and that we have missed will not appear here.
Rule 226 — Tax recovery officer to exercise or perform certain powers and functions of an Assessing Officer under section 413 — on reading the rule
A circular binds the department, not you and not a court. Every one below was written under the 1961 Act; it reaches this section because the department’s own concordance carries the provision it names to this one.
Circular No. 14/2023 — Standard operating procedure SOP for making application for recomputation of total income of a co operative society engaged in the 2023-07-27
Circular No. 04/2012 — Section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income-tax authorities - Instructions to subordinate authorities - Authorization of AOs 2012-06-20
Circular No. 725 — 136. Issue/approval of notifications under section 10(23C)(iv) or section 35(1)(ii)/(iii) after completion of assessment, rectifi 1995-10-16
Circular No. 669 — Section 43B l Deduction to BE Allowed Only on Actual Payment 1993-10-25
Circular No. 668 — 900. Clarification regarding date of limitation for filing appeals 1993-10-20
Circular No. 269 — 1250. Queries regarding jurisdictional problems in regard to interpretation of sub-section (2) and scope of Board’s notification 1980-04-29
Circular No. 189 — 276. Development rebate reserve in the case of industrial undertakings in which there is Government participation and where there 1976-01-30
Circular No. 154 — Amortisation of cost of production/cost of acquiring distribution rights of films - Assessments of film producers/distributors - G 1974-12-05
Circular No. 87 — Penalties based on cancelled/annulled assessments - Authorisation by the Board for taking action in respect of such penalties unde 1972-06-19
Circular No. 81 — Penalties based on cancelled/annulled assessments - Authorisation by the Board for taking action in respect of such penalties unde 1972-03-26
Circular No. 73 — 902. Board’s authorisation for taking action under section 154 beyond time limit specified under section 154(7) in cases where val 1972-01-07
Circular No. 71 — 901. Board’s authorisation for taking action under section 154 beyond time limit specified under section 154(7) in cases of protec 1971-12-20
Circular No. 68 — Section 154 l Rectification of Mistakes 1971-11-17
A notification is made under a power the Act gives and, within that power, is law. These too were made under the 1961 Act and are placed here by the department’s concordance.
Notification: 17 Date of Issue: 26/2/2013 — Section 120 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income-tax Authorities - Jurisdiction of - Specified CIT to Exercise Concurrent Powers & 2013-02-26
Notification No. 285 — S.O. No. 1743 (E). - In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 120 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( 2006-10-10
Read this before you rely on it. Every decision below was decided under the Income-tax Act, 1961. It appears here because it is tagged to a 1961 provision that the department’s own mapping carries to section 287. That is an inference we have drawn, not a holding on the new section: where the words changed in the move, the reasoning may not survive. Treat this as the place to start looking, not as authority on the 2025 Act.
ACIT v Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange LtdSupreme CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.154 A binding decision that covers my point was never considered when my order was passed. Is that a mistake apparent from the record?
CIT v Vatika Township P LtdSupreme CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.154 An amendment adds a new levy. Does it reach back to earlier years?
S.A. Builders Ltd v CIT (Appeals)Supreme CourtCuts both waystagged s.154 I passed borrowed money to my sister concern interest-free. Can the AO disallow the interest I paid?
T. S. Balaram, ITO v Volkart BrothersSupreme CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.154 What actually counts as a 'mistake apparent from the record' under s.154?
Aafreen Fatima Fazal Abbas Sayed v ACITHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.154 I let the 30 days to appeal my 143(1) intimation lapse. Can I still go to the pcit under s.264?
CESC Ltd v DCITHigh CourtCuts both waystagged s.154 The Assessing Officer has issued a section 154 notice to rectify my section 143(1)(a) intimation after a scrutiny notice under section 143(2) was…
Court On Its Own Motion v CITHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.154 CPC has refused my TDS credit and adjusted the refund against an old demand. What did the Delhi High Court actually direct?
Pramod R Agrawal v PCITHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.154 I left a legitimate deduction out of my return and the assessment is over. Can the Commissioner allow it under s.264?
Tamil Nadu Magnesite Ltd v CITHigh CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.154 The Assessing Officer has rectified my old s.143(1)(a) intimation under s.154 after already completing a s.143(3) assessment. Can he do that?
Dixit Rice Mill v DCIT (CPC)ITATtagged s.154 Must an assessee first apply for rectification to CPC before appealing against a s.143(1) intimation?
Orient Craft Ltd v DCITITATHelps departmenttagged s.154 I withdrew my appeal against the section 143(1) intimation because the case went into scrutiny. Can the Assessing Officer now rectify under section…
Subodh Gupta (HUF) v Pr CITITATtagged s.154 My mother gifted shares to my HUF. Is she a 'relative' of the HUF?
What this page does not tell you. It does not reproduce the section. Everything above was written from the section’s own text as the Income Tax Department publishes it — the text is here, and nothing here is advice on your facts. Where a figure matters, read the sub-section it comes from.