9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (4) TMI 293X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the original assessment for the year 1977-78 was completed on 13th Dec., 1979 and the assessment for the year 1978-79 was completed on 6th Feb., 1980 respectively. In the said assessments deduction under s. 8oM (as it then stood) were allowed. Later, the provision of s. 80M was amended by virtue of provision of s. 80AA by Finance (No. 2) Act, 1980 which was given retrospective effect from 1st April, 1968. In view of the said amendment the ITO treated the deduction allowed under s. 80M as mistake apparent from the record and proceeded to rectify the said mistake in both the assessment orders under s. 154 of the IT Act. The objection of the assessee thereto was overruled. The ITO estimated 10 per cent as the expenses for earning the said div ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nds was a deductible matter and so it was outside the purview of s. 154 of the Act as has been decided in the case of Volkart Bros. (supra). The introduction of s. 80AA might have made the original order erroneous, but there was no mistake apparent from the record which could be rectified under s. 154 of the Act because the exact amount of expenses relatable to the earning of the dividends was not available in the original assessment order as so that figure had to be estimated with reference to a number of factors. Hence, we uphold the order of the CIT(A). 4. The provisions of s. 154 of the IT Act would only be involved with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record. So the mistake must be apparent from the record. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aw. But there is no mistake apparent from the record which could be rectified under s. 154 of the IT Act because the exact amount of expenses relating to the earning of the dividend was not available in the original assessment order and so, the figure had to be estimated with reference by the ITO on the basis of his own estimate, without having relation to the records of this case. In our view, in order to attract the provision of s. 154 of the IT Act the error must be apparent from the record. In other words it must appear expressly in the order itself. In the order if the mistake could not be detected, in that event s. 154 could not be invoked as rightly pointed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, we are of the view, the Tribunal has taken a co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
