1983 (3) TMI 91 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the Commissioner (Appeals) to rectify an order passed by the AAC.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) who rectified the order passed by the AAC. The STO rejected the assessee's claim for inclusion of bank loans while determining the capital base under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. The AAC directed the STO to recompute the capital base by including the bank loan. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) rectified the order, stating that the bank loan should have been included in the capital base for working out the chargeable profit at a reduced amount. The assessee contended that the Commissioner (Appeals) had no jurisdiction to rectify the AAC's order, as per a Board's Circular. The departmental representative supported the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order.

Upon hearing both parties, the Tribunal found that only the officer who originally passed the order can rectify any mistake apparent from the record, even after the change of jurisdiction. The Tribunal referred to the Board's Circular, supporting the view that the Commissioner (Appeals) had no jurisdiction to rectify the AAC's order, even after the transfer of jurisdiction. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and allowed the appeal filed by the assessee.