9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 396X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of Mandamus ordering and directing the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-2(I), Mumbai to give effect to the order of the Tribunal as if all the grounds of appeal have been set aside for fresh adjudication. 2. The assessment year to which the dispute relates is 1998-99. On 30 November 1998, the Petitioner filed a return of income declaring a total income of Rs.513.51 crores after claiming a deduction under Sections 80HH, 80I and 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (`the Act'). On 9 February 2001, the Assessing Officer passed an order of assessment under Section 143(3) determining a total income of Rs.580.50 crores. The A.O. denied the benefit of a deduction under Sections 80HH, 80I and 80IA in respect of certain plants and added ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es ascertained/crystalised during the assessment year 1998-99." 4. The Tribunal was seized of appeals filed by the Petitioner for A.Ys. 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000. In its judgment dated 28 May 2007, the Tribunal noted that the only issue involved in the appeals related to the denial of the claim of the assessee under Sections 80HH, 80I and 80IA. The Tribunal noted that the claim of the assessee was denied by the department on the basis of a decision of the Tribunal in the case of Indian Oil Corporation in which it had been held that the mere filing up of gas in cylinders did not amount to an activity of manufacture as a result of which a deduction under these provisions could not be allowed. The Tribunal set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce on 25th September 2012 that the Petitioner was advised that its view that the remaining grounds would still be adjudicated upon by the Tribunal was erroneous and it was advised to take these proceedings. The Petitioner says that thereafter this petition has been filed immediately." In the alternative, as noted earlier, the Petitioner seeks the issuance of a writ of Mandamus to the A.O. to give effect to the order of the Tribunal as if all grounds of appeal have been set aside for fresh adjudication. 7. At the outset it must be noted that it is impossible to construe the order of the Tribunal dated 28 May 2007 as having kept open all the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee for fresh adjudication by the A.O. Fairly, even learned Sen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as passed on 14 November 2008 as well as when the order of the CIT (Appeals) was passed on 26 October 2010, the Petitioner was still within the period of four years stipulated in Section 254(2) for filing an application before the Tribunal for correcting a mistake apparent on the record. The Petitioner failed to adopt the remedy which the statute has provided under Section 254(2). 9. The only other explanation, to which the attention of the Court is drawn, is that in paragraphs 3(H)(iv) and (v) to the effect that the Assistant Manager (Taxation) who scrutinized the order "was about six months old in the taxation department and not very familiar with the subject and the appellate procedure". Moreover, it has been stated that the Senior Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
