9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (12) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... :- 11-12-2002 - Judge(s) : N. V. BALASUBRAMANIAN., K. RAVIRAJA PANDIAN. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by N.V. BALASUBRAMANIAN J.-Counsel for the respondent was absent on December 4, 2002. Today also counsel for the respondent is not present. However, since the respondent has been served, we proceed to dispose of the matter. The appeal was admitted on the following question of law: "Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that for the assessment year 1989-90 the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the section 80HH of the Income-tax Act, even though Hosur, in which town, the assessee's industrial undertaking is located had ceased to be a notified backward area in the year 1986?" The appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued by the Board dated May 1, 1987 and held that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was not correct in holding that the assessee was not entitled to deduction under section 80HH and allowed the appeal. Admittedly, the Revenue has not challenged the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, though it was adverse to the interest of the Revenue and the order of the Appellate Tribunal has become final. However, the Revenue approached the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal by way of miscellaneous petition under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, with a prayer to rectify the order of the Tribunal on the ground that a mistake had crept in the order of the Tribunal by not considering the circular issued in Notification No. 165 dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not eligible for deduction under section 80HH of the Act. We find that the Appellate Tribunal relied upon the same circular to hold that the industries, which were set up prior to the assent of the President on September 10, 1986, to the Taxation Laws (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1986, would be eligible to get deduction under section 80HH of the Act. The Board has also clarified that such industries shall continue to enjoy the benefit under section 80HH. Therefore, it is clear on the facts of the case that more than one view is possible on the interpretation of section 80HH of the Act and there is no glaring mistake present in the order of the Appellate Tribunal requiring the Tribunal to rectify its order. Hence, we hol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
