2018 (6) TMI 1663 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification of mistake - HELD THAT - There is no dispute that the assessee did carry a sum of ₹ 484,22,01,385/- to reserve from 1.4.1997 till 31.3.2003‖. We found that it is an apparent mistake in so far as the said sum was in fact carried to reserve from FY 1989-90 and not from 1.4.1997. Accordingly we correct the same. In Para 16 of order dated 09/10/2015, reference has been made to sub-section 4A inserted in s 41 by the Finance Act 1997. It has however been inadvertently stated that this sub section was inserted with from 1.4.2008. The correct year is however 1998 and not 2008. Since it is an apparent mistake, we rectify the same. Issue whether, balance in Profit Loss Account which is not in the nature of any other reserve having specific objectives , should form part of general reserves has not been specifically adjudicated by the Tribunal. As it is a mistake apparent from record, we recall the order to a limited extent of deciding whether balance in Profit and Loss Account which is not in the nature of ―any other reserve having specific objectives‖, should form part of general reserves . We direct according

Summary

Issues:
1. Correction of apparent mistakes in the order dated 09/10/2015
2. Adjudication of whether the balance in the Profit and Loss Account should form part of general reserves
3. Non-adjudicated grounds unique to AY 2005-06 in the order passed in ITA 5435/MUM/2011

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the correction of apparent mistakes in the order dated 09/10/2015. The learned AR pointed out discrepancies in the order, such as the incorrect year mentioned for the insertion of sub-section 4A in s 41. The Tribunal acknowledged these mistakes and rectified them, ensuring accuracy in the record. The correction process involved revisiting specific details and aligning them with the correct information to maintain the order's integrity.

2. Another issue discussed in the judgment is the adjudication of whether the balance in the Profit and Loss Account should be considered part of general reserves. The Tribunal noted that this specific aspect had not been conclusively determined previously. Recognizing this as a mistake apparent from the record, the Tribunal decided to recall the order to address this particular issue. By doing so, the Tribunal aimed to provide clarity on whether the balance in the Profit and Loss Account, not categorized as any other reserve with specific objectives, should indeed be included in general reserves.

3. The judgment also delves into non-adjudicated grounds unique to AY 2005-06 in the order passed in ITA 5435/MUM/2011. The appellant raised specific grounds related to the deduction under section 36(1)(viii) and the addition of interest on Non-performing Assets under Section 43D of the Income Tax Act. These grounds were not addressed in the initial order, leading to the Tribunal recalling the order to consider and decide on these unresolved issues. This step aimed to ensure a comprehensive examination of all relevant aspects raised by the appellant for a fair and just resolution.

Overall, the judgment reflects a meticulous approach by the Tribunal in rectifying apparent mistakes, addressing unadjudicated issues, and ensuring a thorough review of the case to uphold the principles of justice and accuracy in the legal proceedings.