2018 (1) TMI 1349 - HC - Income Tax

Rectification of mistake - Maintainability of appeal - Challenge to Rectification Order - Investment allowance not available to the assessee, as it is engaged in mining raising, loading and transporting of gypsum from mines owned by RSMM Ltd. and no manufacture or production of any article or things takes place - Whether subsequent judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court rendered in case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. (2004 (11) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT) does amount to an error apparent on the face of record and the learned Tribunal was required to amend/ correct its order in light of final verdict of Hon ble Supreme Court by way of rectification? Held that - In view of the decisions in Chem Amit vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax (2004 (11) TMI 24 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) and CIT (Central), Kanpur vs. Ekta Flavours Pvt. Ltd.(2010 (8) TMI 1109 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT), the appeal is not appropriate remedy. Hence, the same is dismissed. It will be open for the appellant to prefer appropriate proceedings. The period taken from 2007 till today will be taken into consideration while deciding the question of limitation.

Summary

The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the appellant's appeal challenging the Tribunal's decision regarding investment allowance for mining activities. The Court cited previous judgments and stated that the appeal was not the appropriate remedy, allowing the appellant to pursue other proceedings.