9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (1) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in that year – SO we hold that the benefit of the amendment made in section 80HHC by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1991, could not have been extended to the assessee in relation to the assessment year 1984-85 – Whether, Tribunal was right in law in holding that the question of deduction under section 80HHC, was a debatable issue and could not be rectified under section 154?" - Held that the order passed by the Assessing Officer to rectify the mistake committed earlier by allowing deduction to the assessee on the basis of the amended section 80HHC does not suffer from any legal infirmity. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aiming deduction of Rs. 41,674 under section 80HHC of the Act. The Assessing Officer accepted the claim of the assessee and allowed the deduction of Rs. 41,674. However, vide order dated March 23, 1990, the Assessing Officer withdrew the deduction in its entirety. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (hereinafter described as "the CIT (Appeals)), set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and deleted the addition of Rs. 41,674. The Tribunal confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. Reference application filed by the Revenue under section 256(1) of the Act was also dismissed by the Tribunal. We have heard Shri Rajesh Bindal, learned counsel for the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to impress the departmental authorities, its plea did not find favour at the High Court also-On further appeal the apex court also dismissed the appeal that up to April 1, 1991, the provision of section 80HHC restricted the benefit to goods other than minerals and ores and this benefit was prospectively made available to cut and polished minerals with effect from April 1,1991, due to the amendment of the section in that year." By applying the ratio of the aforementioned judgment to the facts of this case, we hold that the benefit of the amendment made in section 80HHC by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1991, could not have been extended to the assessee in relation to the assessment year 1984-85. As regards question No. 2, it is sufficient to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
