9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 534X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the assessment year 2002-03, claiming following substantial questions of law:- i) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the action for rectification under Section 154 is sustainable while on the impugned issue there is a divergent judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court to that of Jurisdictional High Court? ii)Whether the action for initiation of rectification proceedings is sustainable while examining claim of deduction under Section 80HHC, 80IB, while the proceedings are not covered within the words 'mistake apparent from the record'? 3. A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as narrated in the appeal may be noticed. The appellant company is engaged in the business of manufacturin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led by the assessee before the CIT(A) on 24.5.2012, Annexure A.6 to the effect that rectification was not possible if the question was debatable for which reliance was placed on certain decisions. Vide order dated 28.6.2012, Annexure A.7, the CIT(A) confirmed the order dated 22.5.2008 (Annexure A.4). Aggrieved by the order Annexure A.7, the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 22.12.2012, Annexure A.11, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal. Hence the instant appeal by the assessee appellant. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that on merits regarding admissibility of deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act, the Bombay High Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an authority cannot anticipate the view that may be taken by the High Court or the Supreme Court on a subsequent date. If at the time of the passing of the order, the authority takes a particular view, which is not contrary to the existing interpretation of law, the provision of section 154 cannot be invoked. Apparently, the argument of Mr. Bansal appears to be attractive. If the issue of error in the order is to be examined only with reference to the date on which it was passed, it may be possible to legitimately contend that it was legal on the date on which it was passed. The subsequent decision has only rendered it erroneous or illegal. However, there was no error much less an apparent error on the date of its passing. Thus, the provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tent is not to allow it to continue. This purpose has to be promoted. The Legislature's will has to be carried out. By placing a narrow construction, the object of the legislation shall be defeated. Such a consequence should not be countenanced." 8. Adverting to the factual matrix in the present case, the assessee filed its return for the assessment year 2002-03 on 31.10.2002 showing income of Rs. 12,34,993/- which was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act on 17.12.2004 at total income of Rs. 57,87,108/-. Subsequently, it was noticed that deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act was not allowed correctly as according to Section 80IA (9) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
