2023 (1) TMI 965 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification u/s 154 - deduction under section 80IB - HELD THAT - We observed that any mistake apparent from the record can be rectified under section 154 of the Act. The plain meaning of the word 'apparent' is that it must be something which appears to be ex-facie and incapable of argument and debate. Therefore, we find merit in the submissions of ld DR for the Revenue that deduction under section 80IB is a debatable issue which can not be rectified under section 154 of the Act. Therefore, we agree with the reasoning given by ld CIT(A) that the issue of allowing claim u/s 80IB of the IT Act does not come under the purview of mistake apparent from record which is rectifiable u/s 154 of the IT Act as the disallowance u/s 80IB was made by mentioning of cogent reasons given in the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the IT Act by the AO. There is no mistake apparent from the record in the current case and rectification application was rightly rejected by assessing officer. Facts also indicate that the assessment order passed on 29/08/2011 and first rectification application is claimed to have been filed on 26/08/2015. This shows that the assessee missed the deadline for filing regular appeal and recourse to rectification was taken to bring the issue to back to life for further legal remedy. However, by way of rectification petition, the assessee cannot-raise the issue which could have been taken up in regular appeal only. This way, the ld CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the assessing officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order under section 154 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2009-10.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for AY 2009-10, arising from an assessment order under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The grounds of appeal included contentions regarding the dismissal of the appeal by the Commissioner, failure to consider past decisions in favor of the assessee, and the principle of consistency in applying deductions under section 80IB of the Act.

2. The assessee sought rectification under section 154 for disallowance of claim under section 80IB in the original assessment order. The assessing officer rejected the rectification application, stating that the issue did not qualify as a mistake apparent from records under section 154. The Commissioner upheld this decision, emphasizing that the issue was debatable and not a clear mistake for rectification.

3. The assessee argued for rectification based on past decisions in favor of the assessee on similar issues in previous assessment years. However, the Revenue contended that the deduction under section 80IB was a debatable issue and not suitable for rectification under section 154. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue, stating that the issue was not a clear mistake and involved reasoned views by the assessing officer based on various court decisions.

4. The Tribunal noted that a mistake apparent from the record must be ex-facie and incapable of argument or debate to qualify for rectification under section 154. As the issue of deduction under section 80IB was debatable and involved reasoned decisions by the assessing officer, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to dismiss the appeal. The Tribunal found no merit in the case laws presented by the assessee and confirmed the Commissioner's order.

5. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee against the order under section 154 for AY 2009-10, upholding the decisions of the Commissioner and the assessing officer. The Tribunal affirmed that the issue of deduction under section 80IB was not a clear mistake for rectification under section 154, based on the debatable nature of the issue and the assessing officer's reasoned views.